Let's talk CLASS BALANCE

[Harm]

Originally Posted by Zuranthium [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Shaman were the only class that could solo the roaming dragons in Velious.

Not true at all. I personally fear-kited everything that I could land fear on in Western Wastes before Luclin came out. And outside of the SK Epic, I had shit for gear.

I stopped reading this thread in the middle of page two because you went from "discussing class balance" to "lets balance P99". Discuss class balance? Sure. Things were very unbalanced. Luclin AAs made things a lot better. Balance P99? Hell fucking no. You don't want to play a class that ends up on the short side of the stick? Then don't play one. Its your choice, there are no surprises here. The only surprise would be if you were to succeed in your attempts to balance P99. It should remain unbalanced. You're free to create your own Balanced Classic emu if you want. I might even play on it, it would be fun. But that's not why I'm on P99.

[Fryhole]

Originally Posted by Zuranthium [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

And it completely fails at doing so. I agree that should be what the class is capable of doing and I believe that IS what the game designers wanted the class to be capable of, but with the way the game is currently programmed that simply isn't what the class is capable of doing at the higher levels. The Druid absolutely can not fill in as the healer. The druid absolutely can not fill in as a separate form of defense (ie - debuffs to monsters, especially the very import slow mechanic, or some other significant form of damage prevention). The Druid absolutely can not fill in as DPS. The Druid absolutely can not serve as crowd control (in most cases).



Research? I lived Everquest from its earliest (non-beta) days and my mind is perfectly capable of recollection. And FYI, before posting my thoughts, there are some details that I have in fact still gone back to check anyway.

I was there too. Tracking, SoW & teleports were things this class had that caused trade offs. I'm sorry you don't feel that travel and exploration don't justify the trade offs, but that's how it is. I hear what you're saying, however, things are going to stay within Brad McQuaid's lovely vision on p99.

[Zuranthium]

Originally Posted by Grizzled [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This game was designed for each class to have a role. It was not designed like WoW to hodge podge people together and be able to do anything.

*sigh*, yet again not understanding what I wrote. I specifically said each class SHOULD have a role. I do not want EQ to be like WoW, at all, so stop trying to make that comparison.

Originally Posted by Harm [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Not true at all. I personally fear-kited everything that I could land fear on in Western Wastes before Luclin came out. And outside of the SK Epic, I had shit for gear.

I wasn't talking about random monsters in WW, I specifically said the Dragons. When I played, only Shaman were capable of soloing some of the content in WW.

Originally Posted by Fryhole [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The class imbalance is there for a reason. Take SK PAL and WAR. If the warrior coiuld get snap agro like sk or pally, then there would be no need for either of the 2 when all tanks would be warriors who can raid tank and never lose agro in a group. The same goes the other direction. If sk and pally's could take a beating like a warrior from a raid mob, there would be no need for warriiors at all. If we balance the classes, then we now have WoW.

You don't understand the meaning of the word "balance" as I am using it. Every class is supposed to be different and unique. Yes! And you should need certain classes for certain areas of the game. Yes!

But it comes a problem when you need certain classes for EVERY area of the game at higher levels and when other classes are SO weak that they become completely worthless. For example, look at what you just said - "There would be no need for Warriors if a Paladin or SK could ever take a beating." The game balance post original-EQ was such that there was NO need for Paladins and SK's. How is it at all logical that there should be NO need for Paladins and SK's in the game, and Warrior's being necessary 100% of the time, rather than there being times where each class shines depending on the situation?

Paladins and Shadowknights (and Rangers) were essentially worthless in comparison to Warriors at the higher levels until they finally received the much-needed buffs that were given to them into the Velious era. You don't seem to understand that, when Kunark came out, the game balance drastically changed. Warriors were always the best tanks at Level 50 in original EQ, and necessary for Dragons/Gods, but they were never necessary for any other area of the game. When Kunark came out, the skills for each class were not properly balanced and only the Warrior's attack and defense improved as they leveled past 50. Paladins and Shadowknights (and Rangers) were left with abysmal attributes and were so far inferior to Warriors that they were never viable.

The balance of the game mechanics was so bad at one point, in fact, that even though Rangers were doing FAR less damage than Warriors, they would still pull aggro away because of how doing a greater number of attacks via Dual Wielding generated more hate than a Warrior who was attacking much less frequently with a Two-Handed weapon, even though the Warrior was doing twice the damage of the Ranger sometimes. In an attempt to balance this out, they introduced "Jolt" to the game in the Kunark era. It reduced hate on the Ranger so that they could stand there and do their pathetic amount of damage without drawing aggro. It wasn't until well into Velious that much-needed buffs were given to the Hybrids and they were able to actually be useful (and yet the Warrior was still the most in-demand tank, so it didn't shift the game in the way you seem to fear it would).

Originally Posted by Fryhole [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I hear what you're saying, however, things are going to stay within Brad McQuaid's lovely vision on p99.

Do you seriously think everything that happened post Original EQ (but before Luclin) was completely within Brad McQuaid's vision? See, that's the problem here. Much of what is considered "classic EQ" strayed from how the game was originally envisioned as a result of trying to push content out for $$$. The game became very unbalanced as a result of creating new levels, gear, skills, and content that were not properly thought out but rather rushed into production.

[Zuranthium]

Originally Posted by Nagash [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

On Live, I main healed as a shaman in Sebilis or Chardok (during Kunark era) or places like Kael during Velious and that was with no outside healing help and no one else but me to slow our targets.

How is that relevant to what I said? Being able to main heal the entrance areas to those zones, which are not the hardest zones to begin with, hardly means you were able to main heal for the majority of the content. Moreover, you did it as a SHAMAN. I specifically said Shaman could main heal some areas of the game at the later levels because of how powerful their slow was and their mana regeneration. Druids, however, could not. Unless you are talking about a group being able to kill 1 blue-con monster every 10+ minutes because the Druid has to burn their entire freaking bar of mana just to heal through one monster. Such a thing is hardly means you are being effective and is in no way desirable.

Originally Posted by Nagash [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

At some point, the holy trinity became prevalent as it was the most effective way of doing things (group wise) but it was in no way mandatory, nor was it the only workable group backbone.

You are 100% wrong, unless you are just talking about random exp groups where you are kill easy monsters. I'm talking about a 6-man group actually being able to take on some of the harder (not "hardest", where it's certainly fine to require specific classes to be able to beat it) content of the game.

[Nagash]

Originally Posted by Zuranthium [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

*sigh*, yet again not understanding what I wrote. I specifically said each class SHOULD have a role.

Guess what genius, they do.

Originally Posted by Zuranthium [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I wasn't talking about random monsters in WW, I specifically said the Dragons. When I played, only Shaman were capable of soloing some of the content in WW.

Hmm chanty, hmmm necro, hmmm magician, all during Velious era.

Originally Posted by Zuranthium [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

And you should need certain classes for certain areas of the game. Yes!

No you shouldn't and you don't. The only exception being clerics in a raid, that's it. You can rant all you want, this is a fact.

Originally Posted by Zuranthium [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

But it comes a problem when you need certain classes for EVERY area of the game at higher levels

You don't (baring in mind the exception I've noted above).

Originally Posted by Zuranthium [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Paladins and Shadowknights (and Rangers) were essentially worthless in comparison to Warriors at the higher levels until they finally received the much-needed buffs that were given to them into the Velious era. You don't seen to understand that, when Kunark came out, the game balance drastically changed. Warriors were always the best tanks at Level 50 in original EQ, and necessary for Dragons/Gods, but they were never necessary for any other area of the game. When Kunark came out, the skills for each class were not properly balanced and only the Warrior's attack and defense improved as they leveled past 50. Paladins and Shadowknights (and Rangers) were left with abysmal attributes and were so far inferior to Warriors that they were never viable.

Really, I'll tell that to all the pally and sk I knew who were MTing in raid before (and after) Velious. They needed more heal to paliate the lack of the defensive discipline and a bit lower AC and HP (that's one area where you can use druid/pally/shaman for example) but it was perfectly doable and has been done countless time. I'll also tell that to some pallys I know who could MH a standard group grinding during Kunark and Velious.

C'mon man, keep digging, you can do better.

[Misto]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[stormlord]

I've already mentioned it once. But not many people gave attention to it. Is it FUN to play a specialized class (like a cleric, a warrior, a rogue) that does the same thing over and over and over again? Personally, I do not think it's. One person here, at least, said that it was just my preference. So it's my preference that it's not fun to do the same thing over and over again? I thought that humans, in general, like to have options and like to have different things to do so as not to get bored. I thought that humans do not like to grind or camp or farm.

The move towards homogenous classes, if that's what it's, could just reflect the reality that people are too bored with anything else. They like options. They like it when a problem presents itself and they have an array of choices in how they respond. It's not because they want the game to be simpler, it's because they want it to be more complex!! Think about it. More options just means more things to do instead of repetitiveness.

Maybe this is why some people are altahollics. They want options but have to reroll. Maybe games that have classes that're more flexible and/or more homogenous is just a reaction to this desire for choices.

Imagine a class that has all of the skills/abilities of every class in EQ. Now that would be easy-mode, wouldn't it? In the same thought, it would also be incredibly complex to learn. How much do you want to bet that some people would enjoy it? All along we've been told that people want this because they want the game to be dumber, but I think ti's just the opposite. People don't want to get bored with their class. That's all.

We need to ask ourselves: do we invest more in grinding or learning when leveling up?

Sometimes to me I feel we grind for options. But shouldn't we have options from the start? Why should i have to WORK to make my game complex enough to interest me? Why do I have to reroll to get more flavors?

It's like the interesting game is there but it's locked behind a whole bunch of grinding. So in the end ti's like a company is selling grinding, but the carrot is the interesting (complexity) part. The problem is we only get little nibbles of the carrot, it's always dangled in front of us just out of reach. All they want is our money?

[Dozey]

Originally Posted by stormlord [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Most players like to have some flexibility. I still believe my having picked a ranger as my first class in 1999 was the reason I enjoyed everquest. Another reason is I never achieved a high level so never got to experience hell levels or long corpse runs. But anyway, I think that most players want to be able to do a little bit of everything, they just don't know it yet. There might be a few players who like to specialize, but the problem is that once you've done it your only alternative is to reroll. I think that a better solution would be to have a more flexible and changeable class system. Perhaps even a skill-based system. We have to admit these many yeasr later that maybe people just don't enjoy playing a group-dependent character that's stripped of diversity.

Where's the interest in a class that always does the same thing?

Being flexible just means having choices. More things to do means not getting bored.

While new to this particular everquest server, I played eq from about the start of velious until some post god expansion I can't remember the name of. I've also played almost every major mmo that didn't have a final fantasy in it's name or was aion. Most all the way to max lvl (usually in a pitifully sad amount of time after playing eq) and raided in a couple. I greatly dislike the homogenized classes you get in most of the "modern" MMO's and actually feel that EQ achieved something closer to class balance than most of current mmo's have. You weren't balanced because you all did the same thing, but you were balanced because you couldn't do the exact same thing as "class x" regardless of what "class X" was. And almost always there was something you wanted to do that you needed "class x" for. That was more of a check and balances sort of balance as opposed to a teeter totter sort of balanced ( edit: ) and honestly I like it better. In response to the person above me, every class does the same thing over and over in most mmo's. That sounds like not liking mmo's more than not liking the specialized role system. To illustrate this point, no matter how they balance wow rogues, everyone (who wants to actually raid endgame content) picks the spec and rotation that gets the most dps. It's figured out within hours of any patch that changes it, and everyone is that by the end of the day. That is not more options, it's just fake options, sort of like believing a game that has all the non-linear areas full of instakill mobs isn't linear.


edit2: there's the same option to play a not-the-best class and do something in EQ too. you can decide to play a dps enchanter. it's not going to be terribly different from a holy dps priest in wow success wise. Or a dps dominator in rift, or .... you get the idea. The option to suck at something you're not best at is always there. I do dps sololing as an enchanter, my pet (if root actually holds) tanks as an enchanter. That doesn't mean i feel that i should do that for groups, but I CAN do that well enough to solo. Most classes (other than rogues clerics and warriors all of whom get bonus xp in tribute) can do this. I would rather have a much more defined group role that not everyone can do so that I have a reason to join groups rather than be able to do any of those things as well as other classes.

[Zuranthium]

Originally Posted by Nagash [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Guess what genius, they do.

They don't, though. As I've specifically talked about, many of the classes as they are balanced post original-EQ do NOT offer anything viable to a group in comparison to another class.

Originally Posted by Nagash [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Hmm chanty, hmmm necro, hmmm magician, all during Velious era.

They weren't able to beat the specific monster I am talking about. Only Shaman could. (Well, a Magician chain casting the epic pet is a different story, but that's hardly relevant given how inaccessible such a thing is)

Originally Posted by Nagash [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

No you shouldn't and you don't. The only exception being clerics in a raid, that's it.

Without a very specific setup it was literally IMPOSSIBLE to group in the majority of the high-end content areas of the game. You did NOT play during those eras if you believe so.

Originally Posted by Nagash [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Also tell that to some pallys I know who could MH a standard group grinding during Kunark and Velious.

Once again, completely irrelevant. A grinding group is not high end content. You are also missing the point of efficiency and practicality. As I said in my other post, sure a Druid CAN heal through some areas, but only by expending an entire bar of mana for one single monster and causing a ridiculously massive downtime for the party. Nobody wants to play like that.

[Zuranthium]

Originally Posted by Dozey [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

That was more of a check and balances sort of balance as opposed to a teeter totter sort of balanced.

This is a wonderful way of putting it! Thank you! Game balance should be such that there are checks and balances where every class is useful because they offer something different, not because every archtype can do the same thing exactly as well as each other class within that archtype.