We Want...!!!! (Please Read and Feedback) - Page 5

Illuminator · 12-21-2007, 10:11 AM

Once they finish mergers of the current classes you all can do what the fuck you want, I'll be even submitting my own idea for a playable clockwork race/class......

spiky · 12-21-2007, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Troubrin

OK I understand this is a love or hate subject. Please know I've thought long and hard about this.
Don't tell me i want hunter's or wat ever from WoW i tried WoW for 3 minutes and had to log out.

But i want beastlords. or something similar.

I understand due to the way the class system works SoE can NOT just add 1 class. They would either have to make a new tree, or add 2 class's to each tree. But I would like a melee pet class.

Maybe if i get enough people to agree with me SoE will think about it

lol, discuss

soe will never consider this they said beast lord was the biggest mistake in eq1 and will never be seen in eq2...

Madrix · 12-21-2007, 11:19 AM

LFG, praps you could make any thread started that asks for Beastlords, an automatic 2 week ban?

Meepers · 12-21-2007, 01:48 PM

I find it hilarious that people have commented that Beastlords are part of history.. yet eq1 has a much higher subscription rate than eq2 :p

Faabio · 12-21-2007, 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Meepers

I find it hilarious that people have commented that Beastlords are part of history.. yet eq1 has a much higher subscription rate than eq2 :p

By that logic we might as well just bring in all of WoW's classes too~

smesh · 12-21-2007, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spiky

soe will never consider this they said beast lord was the biggest mistake in eq1 and will never be seen in eq2...

A bigger mistake then Complete Heal? Dunno what "Biggest Mistake" list you're looking at, but beastlords ain't on it.

They were considered underpowered for a long time. SOE gave them Spiritual Purity (a mana regen spell, for those that didn't play EQ1) to make them a more desirable class. They were only the third class to get a castable buff like that. That was some serious lovin', back in the day. Hardly the thing you'd give to a 'mistake' class.

smallbog · 12-21-2007, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spiky

soe will never consider this they said beast lord was the biggest mistake in eq1 and will never be seen in eq2...

They also said no transfers from Test server.

Just sayin'.

Meepers · 12-22-2007, 01:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Faabio

By that logic we might as well just bring in all of WoW's classes too~

Missed the point~ was specificly refering to the post that said Beastlords are history/non-exhistant anymore.. when they obviously aren't since Eq2 has a lower Subscription rate than Eq1.. nowhere was there any comparison to WoW or classes from other games

Slamdar · 12-22-2007, 01:45 AM

5 pages too late but...

What we really want is a finished expansion when it is released and not one with broken shit in it, horrible itemization, and completely fucking retarded encounters.

The thing that I find amazing is how the big thing about RoK was going to be the epics, yet they are still not in the game, and won't be til at least the next live update. It is bad when an unfinished game is using things such as epics as a sales pitch to get in some extra cash while the promised thing is not delivered upon release and the players have to endure 2-3+ months of extremely shitty implementation of everything. God I love EQ2.

methulah · 12-22-2007, 02:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Meepers

Missed the point~ was specificly refering to the post that said Beastlords are history/non-exhistant anymore.. when they obviously aren't since Eq2 has a lower Subscription rate than Eq1.. nowhere was there any comparison to WoW or classes from other games

Pretty sure that isn't the case, Meepers. I was under the impression that EQ2 had overtaken EQ1 in subscriptions some time ago. In any case though, your logic is flawed. Just because a game has one feature, and is more popular than a game without that feature, doesn't imply that the feature is a positive one. Correlation does not equate causation, after all.