A Large-Scale Fundamental Change to EQ2 - Page 5

Emanji · 11-30-2007, 05:02 PM

IMO Classes that don't need 2 different flavors are:

Druid
Shaman
Cleric (WTF is an inquisitor? an evil cleric? makes no sense.)
Rouge
Bard
Brawler

Calbiyum · 11-30-2007, 05:11 PM

Why not make Good have Druids and Cleric and give evil Druids and Shaman?

Jovie · 11-30-2007, 05:11 PM

Hi, first time, long time

While i could see the merits of certain class consolidations, i would think that it would be a complete and total game killer, at least for segments of its population.

Many people have grown quite attached to their characters "identity" and would probably fee betrayed if they had to be known by another class name.

Instead of sweeping class changes, i think a better course would be to bring itemization that is class defining. Carefully designed and tested items that are admired and sought after.

When i think of the eq2 loot table, not many items come to mind as memorable. In good ole eq1, at least within the first incantation and the next couple of expacs, people knew exactly what you were talking about when you named certain items. Just doesn't happen much here.

I am not talking about epics, but fun things you can get while you are out and about that would make you that much better at your class.

One drastic change that i would love to see is the removal of heroic and solo tags from mobs. Bump up the current solo ones and perhaps tone down the heroic ones a bit and just make a mob a mob.
This would open up more of the game world for a much larger audience.

Groupers would have reason to fight in the out of doors, soloers and duoers would feel a bit safer to go inside.
The core mechanic of experiance in eq1 was that grouping was viable due to A) rate of killing and B) safety in numbers.
Somewhere in time they decided to bump up exp on heroics in eq2 but this did nothing but put a big wall of seperation between the adventuring styles.

Anyway, there is a lot of room for improvement in eq2 but i think they need to be careful and be mindful of their community in anything they do.

Jovie · 11-30-2007, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sylvia

IMO Classes that don't need 2 different flavors are:

Druid
Shaman
Cleric (WTF is an inquisitor? an evil cleric? makes no sense.)
Rouge
Bard
Brawler

Thinking about this now, the game would have been much better off with fewer classes at the start and use the AA system as a path to individualize things later on. So like start a bard and eventually you focus on one path or another and end up specializing as a Dirge.

Illuminator · 11-30-2007, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prof

A warlock with FD and Lifeburn? I'd be unstoppable!

Are necros unstoppable?

The naysayers almost never mention class specifics. That gives me hope that they really have no argument anyway.

Talonis · 11-30-2007, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jovie

Hi, first time, long time

While i could see the merits of certain class consolidations, i would think that it would be a complete and total game killer, at least for segments of its population.

Many people have grown quite attached to their characters "identity" and would probably fee betrayed if they had to be known by another class name.

Instead of sweeping class changes, i think a better course would be to bring itemization that is class defining. Carefully designed and tested items that are admired and sought after.

When i think of the eq2 loot table, not many items come to mind as memorable. In good ole eq1, at least within the first incantation and the next couple of expacs, people knew exactly what you were talking about when you named certain items. Just doesn't happen much here.

I am not talking about epics, but fun things you can get while you are out and about that would make you that much better at your class.

One drastic change that i would love to see is the removal of heroic and solo tags from mobs. Bump up the current solo ones and perhaps tone down the heroic ones a bit and just make a mob a mob.
This would open up more of the game world for a much larger audience.

Groupers would have reason to fight in the out of doors, soloers and duoers would feel a bit safer to go inside.
The core mechanic of experiance in eq1 was that grouping was viable due to A) rate of killing and B) safety in numbers.
Somewhere in time they decided to bump up exp on heroics in eq2 but this did nothing but put a big wall of seperation between the adventuring styles.

Anyway, there is a lot of room for improvement in eq2 but i think they need to be careful and be mindful of their community in anything they do.

Three years into the game and the bolded text above is still epic fail. The game is itemcentric instead of being character focused. Why wait for EQ3 to get it right? If this game is too far gone as some of you say, why not explore change if we're just hanging out waiting for this horse to die? There are frustrated players everywhere. Healers that refuse to lower themselves to equipping leather, chanters with no clear role in the game, crusaders following the rest of the game around like illegitimate crimson-haired children, brawlers that are dps with taunts, you get the picture. I like this game and think it can be better. I'm willing to take the risk. I am the [very small] minority in thinking so, apparently. The band-aid approach has yeilded little in the way of improvement. More has been done for housing, brokers, and the persona button than for the toons themselves, with the exception of the introduction of AA. I just don't see how continued band-aid development can solve the issues this game still faces, issues in which some date back to launch.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jovie

Thinking about this now, the game would have been much better off with fewer classes at the start and use the AA system as a path to individualize things later on. So like start a bard and eventually you focus on one path or another and end up specializing as a Dirge.

Bingo. It still can be.

Edwin Ahe · 11-30-2007, 05:57 PM

OP should consider suicide imho.

Any NGE-type change will kill this game instantly, even before this change goes live.

Quote:

Cleric (WTF is an inquisitor? an evil cleric? makes no sense.)

What makes no sense? That there can be cleric of evil god?

Talonis · 11-30-2007, 06:04 PM

I'm probably not going to follow the suggestion to off myself, but I'll add you to the 'I'm skeerd' pile.

Corsica · 11-30-2007, 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinski

Any major change in EQ2 now, no matter how much it is needed, will doom the game.

End of story. It doesn't matter, the game is doomed if it does any more major changes like LU13. People will quit the game in a mass just because they see change is on the horizon, no matter what the change is. You can't do massive changes to EQ2 at a single time, you have to do small, simple steps to get there. Which means no class mergers. EQ2 is in the damned if you do, damned if you don't stage of a game's life, which is basically the end of it.

What he said

Prof · 11-30-2007, 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Illuminator

Are necros unstoppable?

The naysayers almost never mention class specifics. That gives me hope that they really have no argument anyway.

Nah, necros are stoppable because they don't have the warlock's aoe dps.. but add huge single target dps (lifeburn) to the warlock, and a real deaggro(fd), and I just became master of all trades.

And I thought it was the opposite. All those opposing this idea are giving specific things they don't like aobut such broad sweeping changes, and then those for it say, yea but don't worry cuz it'll be covered in the change, without mentioning specifics.