In a perfect world, my ideal Pantheon would involve:
1. A vast open world. All players should not be funneled through all content. I know content is hard to create. I know it seems "wasteful" to create an area that some people will see an others won't. This is what makes it feel like a world.
2. A significantly long leveling time (350+ hours from min to max).
3. Group content I would like to be non instanced like EQ and VG was. Part of the fun was having other groups around, and dungeons being so large they could support multiple groups at a time. Also different camps having different risk/reward. I.e. king camp in sebilis had a chance at fungi tunic, but you REALLY had to be on your game to not get swamped. Your puller had to know mob routes perfectly, you had to keep track of spawn times, etc etc. Raid content im not as concerned about it being instanced, as long as there are lockout timers (EQ's spawn times were essentially lockout timers). Though I would like to see some roaming dragons in high level outdoor areas, etc.
4. Rare mob spawns with loot tables that have somewhat common drops and very rare drops. It was awesome to be excited just to have a mob spawn, and then if it dropped that super rare item, it was like winning the lottery.
5. Well defined classes/roles, and class interdependency. I really hate the idea of this morphing BS you get in modern MMO's. If I pick a class, I want to be a specialist at something. If I'm a rogue, I want to be able to do single target damage out the wazoo. However I should be bad at AoE, and completely useless at being a tank.
6. Multiple starting cities differentiated based on race. Perhaps not as much as EQ, but say high elves and wood elves would have one starting city. Humans another. Dwarves and Halflings another. Etc, etc.
7. Travel takes a long time. Some of my best memories were trekking from Halas to Freeport with my buddy who started a barbarian warrior as a level 13 paladin. Kithicor was awesome.
8. Nothing even resembling a personal quest / storyline, particularly if its a "your the hero/savior of the world" sort of thing. One of the main things that made early MMOs awesome was that you were just some tool with a crappy sword when you started out. You had to work your way up from the mud.
Minor stuff, that would be nice, but whatevs:
1. "zones" with large level ranges and high level mobs wandering around you had to be wary of.
2. Faction system similar to EQ. There should be places different classes and races can't venture without extreme risk. And, if I wan't to slaughter enough dark elves, as a dark elf shadow knight that I can walk into the High Elf Paladin guild and they love me, I should be able to do that.
I'm sure im missing some stuff, but, thought I'd put this out there.
2. I don't even want traditional levels. I would prefer a proficiency stat. I kill 10k imps my character should dominate imps, if I have killed 2 minotaurs, my character should be inefficient at killing them. This applies to every creature in the game. I can choose to dominate a few over tens to hundreds of hours or dominate the whole world over thousands of hours.
5. Screw balance, there is enough of that in the real world. I agree whole heartedly with your number 5.
Balance is extremely important games, especially in multiplayer games, including MMOs.
For example if I would design a PvP game, I would start with say 5 classes and make sure every class in general wins against 2 other classes and in general loses against the other 2. Then I'd try to tweek to make all differences smaller, give each class countermeasures to the weaknesses the two superior classes exploit, ideally until if everyone plays perfect, the chances of everyone against everyone is 50:50, though obviously ultimately thats impossible.
What should be avoided is the situation that for example everyone can kill a Cleric and the Rogue slaughters everybody else, as I've seen it in Lineage 2.
Perfect balance of course is impossible. But if another class has an
advantage over your own class, your class has to have an advantage over
the other class.
I also really love the array of classes we got so far for Pantheon:
Warrior Crusader (Paladin) Dire Lord (Shadow Knight / Dread Knight)
Rogue Ranger Monk
Cleric Shaman Druid (possibly this time around a full healer class ? Would make sense, for symmetry reasons)
Wizard Summoner (EQ Mage; VG has no equivalent) Enchanter (VG called them Psionicist)
Thats Vanguard classes, but all classes from VG that have been unbalanced (Bard as the total OP group class, Necromancer and Disciple as the total OP solists) have been removed and the Summoner as specialized pet class added.
The only issue is, if we have a Pentinity Tank-Healer-PhysDD-MagicDD-CC, we are still a bit short on classes. The tanks, healers, PhysDD and MagicDD are obvious, but the only CC class is Enchanter.
And its doubtful that they changed the nature of the classes fundamentally - for example in Lineage 2 the Rogue had a ***load of CC.
Balance is extremely important games, especially in multiplayer games, including MMOs.
For example if I would design a PvP game, I would start with say 5 classes and make sure every class in general wins against 2 other classes and in general loses against the other 2. Then I'd try to tweek to make all differences smaller, give each class countermeasures to the weaknesses the two superior classes exploit, ideally until if everyone plays perfect, the chances of everyone against everyone is 50:50, though obviously ultimately thats impossible.
That is actually much of the reason games suffer so many balancing issues and flavor of the month scenarios.
A better way is to just create classes each with a unique purpose and very general balancing, then to make them work well together so that the synergy of all 5 classes is more powerful than having multiples of the rest.
Some classes just shouldn't be able to kill most other classes in a 1v1, period. Not in a multiplayer game where teamwork, interdependence and class diversity is important.
Balance is extremely important games, especially in multiplayer games, including MMOs.
For example if I would design a PvP game, I would start with say 5 classes and make sure every class in general wins against 2 other classes and in general loses against the other 2. Then I'd try to tweek to make all differences smaller, give each class countermeasures to the weaknesses the two superior classes exploit, ideally until if everyone plays perfect, the chances of everyone against everyone is 50:50, though obviously ultimately thats impossible.
That is actually much of the reason games suffer so many balancing issues and flavor of the month scenarios.
A better way is to just create classes each with a unique purpose and very general balancing, then to make them work well together so that the synergy of all 5 classes is more powerful than having multiples of the rest.
Some classes just shouldn't be able to kill most other classes in a 1v1, period. Not in a multiplayer game where teamwork, interdependence and class diversity is important.
Greener syndrome is what ends up killing those games. One person plays one class, sees another class that can do something they can't, then complains about it. This repeats from class to class from issue to issue. Even EQ suffered from this form class envy.
I think mainstreams solution was to make every class basically the same because they didn't want to hurt peoples delicate egos. Even then, people still found was to whine about the game.
Eh, true "balance" is only important in a PvP game. In a PvE game balance can be achieved by specialists. I never once heard a monk complain about not out dps'ing say, a rogue, because they had other job functions, like pulling, that they could do that a rogue couldn't. Really the only time I heard whinging was from Warriors complaining that SK/Pal could out taunt them. However, warriors were FAR better raid tanks. So, while SK/PAL were arguably better group tanks, they all had their specialties.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
On release EQ, it took me about 10 months to reach cap, and only because Kunark came out and exp was much better due to higher level mobs.
They were doing the same thing as people do in P99, which is mass pulls with a bard. You can level someone fast that way. It wasn't nearly as common back in the day as it is on P99. But, point is, its doable. I did mass chardok pulls on my monk to get from 54-60 on p99 and that took me about a week (3-5% of a level per pull). It took a lot of farming as you needed faction enough to be able to walk around in chardok, as well as you had to camp a levitate cloak in the karanas. Either way, it was much faster than doing it the "normal" way.
Point is we're talking about very specific scenarios. I honestly don't care if some neckbeard wants to poopsock the game and get to max level in 3 weeks. That's going to be by far the minority. Im concerned about the leveling curve for the average person. If you take somewhere between 300 and 500 hours of "pure" xping to reach max, that will equate to 6 months to a year to max level if they're doing the "other" stuff the game offers along the way.
P1999's leveling curve is faster, and significantly so. I'm pretty sure the group exp modifier is different; however, I know they don't have the class penalties (or bonuses) that were in at launch.
There are no longer any class experience penalties For historical purposes, these used to be the penalties: Paladin / Shadowknight / Ranger / Bard -40% Monk -20% Wizard / Magician / Enchanter / Necromancer -10% Rogue +9% Warrior +10%
But, in addition to that, P1999 is going to be quicker by the nature of the game being familiar. Everyone knows the good exp spots, knows the classes, skills, etc.
But yeah, I'd agree with Hrimnir, even with those scenarios he listed and a modified exp curve, as long as Pantheon is releasing expansions and not timelocked - the people getting power leveled will simply get to max level and move on, it's only a bigger issue on P1999 as there are a lot of people with not a lot to do (I haven't played since Velious was released though so maybe it's better now).
Agreed with his point on balance as well, but, I still think you'll have classes whining regardless.
On release EQ, it took me about 10 months to reach cap, and only because Kunark came out and exp was much better due to higher level mobs.
They were doing the same thing as people do in P99, which is mass pulls with a bard. You can level someone fast that way. It wasn't nearly as common back in the day as it is on P99. But, point is, its doable. I did mass chardok pulls on my monk to get from 54-60 on p99 and that took me about a week (3-5% of a level per pull). It took a lot of farming as you needed faction enough to be able to walk around in chardok, as well as you had to camp a levitate cloak in the karanas. Either way, it was much faster than doing it the "normal" way.
Point is we're talking about very specific scenarios. I honestly don't care if some neckbeard wants to poopsock the game and get to max level in 3 weeks. That's going to be by far the minority. Im concerned about the leveling curve for the average person. If you take somewhere between 300 and 500 hours of "pure" xping to reach max, that will equate to 6 months to a year to max level if they're doing the "other" stuff the game offers along the way.
P1999's leveling curve is faster, and significantly so. I'm pretty sure the group exp modifier is different; however, I know they don't have the class penalties (or bonuses) that were in at launch.
There are no longer any class experience penalties For historical purposes, these used to be the penalties: Paladin / Shadowknight / Ranger / Bard -40% Monk -20% Wizard / Magician / Enchanter / Necromancer -10% Rogue +9% Warrior +10%
But, in addition to that, P1999 is going to be quicker by the nature of the game being familiar. Everyone knows the good exp spots, knows the classes, skills, etc.
But yeah, I'd agree with Hrimnir, even with those scenarios he listed and a modified exp curve, as long as Pantheon is releasing expansions and not timelocked - the people getting power leveled will simply get to max level and move on, it's only a bigger issue on P1999 as there are a lot of people with not a lot to do (I haven't played since Velious was released though so maybe it's better now).
Agreed with his point on balance as well, but, I still think you'll have classes whining regardless.
Apologies, but you are wrong. P99 didn't remove the xp penalties and bonuses until 09/21/2015. This coincided with roughly the same time that original EQ did the same thing, which was after the start of Velious.
You are correct that it will be faster due to more familiarity. But where you are making the mistake is that the amount of XP needed to level is identical. Its just that we are more proficient and efficient at gaining XP than we may have during original EQ.
Group XP is no longer averaged to compensate for XP Modifiers (Class Bonuses, Racial Bonuses/Penalties).
Root and Movement Speed type effects will now stack.
Blue Diamond jewelry is now craftable. Previous pieces of Blue Diamond jewelry which were statless abbreviations should now function properly.
Guardian Trekolz now spawns in Skyshrine.
Edit: Just FYI i wasn't intending to be insulting, just to point out timeframes. When most of us that did play P99 played it, we leveled with the XP penalties, just like "back in the day"
Edit 2: Who gives a shit, let them whine. We got to where we are because of caving to whiners. If they don't like, no one is forcing them to play it.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
On release EQ, it took me about 10 months to reach cap, and only because Kunark came out and exp was much better due to higher level mobs.
They were doing the same thing as people do in P99, which is mass pulls with a bard. You can level someone fast that way. It wasn't nearly as common back in the day as it is on P99. But, point is, its doable. I did mass chardok pulls on my monk to get from 54-60 on p99 and that took me about a week (3-5% of a level per pull). It took a lot of farming as you needed faction enough to be able to walk around in chardok, as well as you had to camp a levitate cloak in the karanas. Either way, it was much faster than doing it the "normal" way.
Point is we're talking about very specific scenarios. I honestly don't care if some neckbeard wants to poopsock the game and get to max level in 3 weeks. That's going to be by far the minority. Im concerned about the leveling curve for the average person. If you take somewhere between 300 and 500 hours of "pure" xping to reach max, that will equate to 6 months to a year to max level if they're doing the "other" stuff the game offers along the way.
P1999's leveling curve is faster, and significantly so. I'm pretty sure the group exp modifier is different; however, I know they don't have the class penalties (or bonuses) that were in at launch.
There are no longer any class experience penalties For historical purposes, these used to be the penalties: Paladin / Shadowknight / Ranger / Bard -40% Monk -20% Wizard / Magician / Enchanter / Necromancer -10% Rogue +9% Warrior +10%
But, in addition to that, P1999 is going to be quicker by the nature of the game being familiar. Everyone knows the good exp spots, knows the classes, skills, etc.
But yeah, I'd agree with Hrimnir, even with those scenarios he listed and a modified exp curve, as long as Pantheon is releasing expansions and not timelocked - the people getting power leveled will simply get to max level and move on, it's only a bigger issue on P1999 as there are a lot of people with not a lot to do (I haven't played since Velious was released though so maybe it's better now).
Agreed with his point on balance as well, but, I still think you'll have classes whining regardless.
Apologies, but you are wrong. P99 didn't remove the xp penalties and bonuses until 09/21/2015. This coincided with roughly the same time that original EQ did the same thing, which was after the start of Velious.
You are correct that it will be faster due to more familiarity. But where you are making the mistake is that the amount of XP needed to level is identical. Its just that we are more proficient and efficient at gaining XP than we may have during original EQ.
Group XP is no longer averaged to compensate for XP Modifiers (Class Bonuses, Racial Bonuses/Penalties).
Root and Movement Speed type effects will now stack.
Blue Diamond jewelry is now craftable. Previous pieces of Blue Diamond jewelry which were statless abbreviations should now function properly.
Guardian Trekolz now spawns in Skyshrine.
Edit: Just FYI i wasn't intending to be insulting, just to point out timeframes. When most of us that did play P99 played it, we leveled with the XP penalties, just like "back in the day"
Edit 2: Who gives a shit, let them whine. We got to where we are because of caving to whiners. If they don't like, no one is forcing them to play it.
So is P1999 striving to recreate the same problems that EQ did? I thought the removing of the penalties was a huge slap to the face in EQ when they initially did it. People picked certain classes for the pros/cons and when they removed them, those classes/races still had all their pros, but none of their cons. It was the beginning of appealing to the convenience whiner crowd.
Hey Brad, I can't remember because this was at the time where you guys were moving on, but was this a decision you and your team made about exp penalties? It doesn't sound like it, as I remember you going head to head with many people on the forum for features in your "Vision" back in the day, which was nice to see as companies these days all kiss the ass of the players, even if they are wrong.
Apologies, but you are wrong. P99 didn't remove the xp penalties and bonuses until 09/21/2015. This coincided with roughly the same time that original EQ did the same thing, which was after the start of Velious.
After doing more research, you are correct - my apologies. I could have sworn they were different, but I must have just leveled much faster due to familiarity. No insult taken - I prefer for accurate information to be circulated.
They actually planned for hybrids to be considerably more powerful, at the cost of more necessary experience. That was something they quickly learned in beta to be a bad idea. The whole experience penalty was just something that was never removed (until years later). There was literally no reason for it after they adjusted hybrids to be in line with everyone else.
They actually planned for hybrids to be considerably more powerful, at the cost of more necessary experience. That was something they quickly learned in beta to be a bad idea. The whole experience penalty was just something that was never removed (until years later). There was literally no reason for it after they adjusted hybrids to be in line with everyone else.
There were racial exp penalties as well though. I don't remember the idea that they wanted the hybrids to be more powerful, rather that they have more tools to work with over the primary classes, so as a form of con, it was supposed to be more expensive to level one. I mean, SoE made hybrids more powerful anyway (remember the hybrid vs primary wars and balance issues?).
I remember people whining about paladins being worthless, but completely ignoring they could do some tanking, could do some minor support heal (or oh shit healing), and provide some DPS. That was ridiculously useful in groups, but some people wanted all the hybrid abilities and then to compete with primary classes (the beginning of the homogenization problem).
Now whether exp penalties was the right "con" for such a design, that I won't argue, but man it really pissed me off back then when they removed all those penalties (racial as well). I was a human monk, seeing in the dark was a MAJOR problem back then, but... other races had penalties so it balanced out. When they removed them, being a human with no night site was all bad and no good. It was my first experience of catering to the whines (because people whined like crazy about the penalties, especially during the hell levels).
One thing Pantheon better really pay attention to is not to implement features with pros/cons and then remove them later because of tantrums. That is a crappy thing to do in a game such as this.
Hybrids are always hard...You cant give them the heals of a Cleric, the tanking of a Warrior, and the DPS of a rogue....Its hard to make them just right to where they aren't too OP or too gimp.
Hybrids are always hard...You cant give them the heals of a Cleric, the tanking of a Warrior, and the DPS of a rogue....Its hard to make them just right to where they aren't too OP or too gimp.
Well, it is hard to get people to accept the benefits of a true hybrid class. That is, many people are very narrow in their evaluation. They break down the value of a class in basic forms Tanking, healing, DPS and then if their class isn't competitive in those, they think they are worthless. They refuse to accept that it is the versatility of that class which is its true power.
I tried to explain this to a SK player one day in EQ who was whining about it. I pointed out all the special things that he could do that each of the main classes couldn't. He didn't care, because he wasn't the best tank or the best DPS, there was a flaw in the class.
Now if you said "why don't you paly a warrior if you want to be such a great tank?" and the response was... "What? and lose all these abilities (pets, self heals, snares, fears, etc...)". They just didn't get it.
Is this why bard didnt make the cut for the first classes? I found it odd that as popular as Bard is it didnt make it and that other less popular classes did. So now I wonder if it didnt get delayed because of potential complaints/ worry over balance issues due to it being a hybrid class
Luckily it looks like they will try to get it out for release but if not the 1st expansion.
Making the almost entirely group oriented makes me nervous. When new games launch finding groups is not an issue. How about months later? You will often find less players and harder time finding groups. I see this in so many games. Well, maybe WoW would be the exception since there are millions playing that game. Grouping is not bad but I hate spending a long time looking for people to do content.
Also, there are those times you want to just log in and fool around solo.
My ideal Pantheon would have solo content and dungeons /raids requiring group play.
Making the almost entirely group oriented makes me nervous. When new games launch finding groups is not an issue. How about months later? You will often find less players and harder time finding groups. I see this in so many games. Well, maybe WoW would be the exception since there are millions playing that game. Grouping is not bad but I hate spending a long time looking for people to do content.
Also, there are those times you want to just log in and fool around solo.
My ideal Pantheon would have solo content and dungeons /raids requiring group play.
Why does it make you nervous? With the hundreds of games out there that do cater to such, you have no worries. Besides, EQ has been around for many years, long before WoW and it was a group based content game.
Nobody says you can't solo either. Just don't expect it to cater to it. Just like EQ, there is likely to be some classes that can solo fairly well for those who figure out how to skillful do it.
No solo content here. If that is your interest, your "ideal" game is elsewhere and there are plenty of them, PM me if you would like a very long list of games that will cater to your every solo desire!
P1999's leveling curve is faster, and significantly so. I'm pretty sure the group exp modifier is different; however, I know they don't have the class penalties (or bonuses) that were in at launch.
There are no longer any class experience penalties For historical purposes, these used to be the penalties: Paladin / Shadowknight / Ranger / Bard -40% Monk -20% Wizard / Magician / Enchanter / Necromancer -10% Rogue +9% Warrior +10%
But, in addition to that, P1999 is going to be quicker by the nature of the game being familiar. Everyone knows the good exp spots, knows the classes, skills, etc.
But yeah, I'd agree with Hrimnir, even with those scenarios he listed and a modified exp curve, as long as Pantheon is releasing expansions and not timelocked - the people getting power leveled will simply get to max level and move on, it's only a bigger issue on P1999 as there are a lot of people with not a lot to do (I haven't played since Velious was released though so maybe it's better now).
Agreed with his point on balance as well, but, I still think you'll have classes whining regardless.
Apologies, but you are wrong. P99 didn't remove the xp penalties and bonuses until 09/21/2015. This coincided with roughly the same time that original EQ did the same thing, which was after the start of Velious.
You are correct that it will be faster due to more familiarity. But where you are making the mistake is that the amount of XP needed to level is identical. Its just that we are more proficient and efficient at gaining XP than we may have during original EQ.
Group XP is no longer averaged to compensate for XP Modifiers (Class Bonuses, Racial Bonuses/Penalties).
Root and Movement Speed type effects will now stack.
Blue Diamond jewelry is now craftable. Previous pieces of Blue Diamond jewelry which were statless abbreviations should now function properly.
Guardian Trekolz now spawns in Skyshrine.
Edit: Just FYI i wasn't intending to be insulting, just to point out timeframes. When most of us that did play P99 played it, we leveled with the XP penalties, just like "back in the day"
Edit 2: Who gives a shit, let them whine. We got to where we are because of caving to whiners. If they don't like, no one is forcing them to play it.
So is P1999 striving to recreate the same problems that EQ did? I thought the removing of the penalties was a huge slap to the face in EQ when they initially did it. People picked certain classes for the pros/cons and when they removed them, those classes/races still had all their pros, but none of their cons. It was the beginning of appealing to the convenience whiner crowd.
Hey Brad, I can't remember because this was at the time where you guys were moving on, but was this a decision you and your team made about exp penalties? It doesn't sound like it, as I remember you going head to head with many people on the forum for features in your "Vision" back in the day, which was nice to see as companies these days all kiss the ass of the players, even if they are wrong.
The goal of P99 was to present the experience as close as possible as to the way it was back then. Not to reimagine it, etc. So they try to release patches and changes at the same overall time frame as back when EQ did.
I have to disagree with you though on the removal. I remember my friend calling me and telling me they did that, i played a paladin, and i was literally overjoyed. Back then the penalties did FAR more harm than the bonuses. Paladins for example had a 40% xp cut, that means it literally took me almost 2x as long to level as the baseline. However, best case scenario the people who had the bonuses were maybe 15% faster than the norm.
The reason why it was a good thing is because when you grouped, those negatives got split into the group XP. So a group who had a warrior as a tank would get a crapton more XP then the Paladin or SK. It became a lead weight attached to out ankles and it made it VERY difficult to get groups because back then, if someone was in a group with a hybrid, that meant they were getting 5-10% less XP than they would with a warrior, etc.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
Is this why bard didnt make the cut for the first classes? I found it odd that as popular as Bard is it didnt make it and that other less popular classes did. So now I wonder if it didnt get delayed because of potential complaints/ worry over balance issues due to it being a hybrid class
Luckily it looks like they will try to get it out for release but if not the 1st expansion.
No idea why the Bard didn't make it in with the original announced classes, but speaking in EQesque terms at least, they wouldn't be difficult to balance. The class was considered a "hybrid," but it was truly unique. Again, using EQ as an example - it would be much more difficult to balance the Dreadknight/crusader (Paladin/Shadowknight) with the warrior who share the same role.
I think they'll recycle the no hybrid concept of Vanguard.
I.e. you can pick any tank class, and its as good as their peers. Same for healers.
The main issue with Vanguard Bards was that solo they've not been much (high runspeed but mediocre ranged dps), but in group they've been almost godlike - very high dps (rivaled Rogues and Sorcerers, really), buffs the group damage drastically (like a flat 60% increase and thats not counting other buffs on top of that), and on top of that the second best CC class after Psionicist (i.e. Vanguard Enchanter).
Thus I sure hope they tone the Bards down in Pantheon.
I thought the removing of the penalties was a huge slap to the face in EQ when they initially did it.
I think xp penalties are crazy stupid.
If you feel the need to give a class a xp penalty, its obviously overpowered and need to be NERFED ASAP.
Same for a xp bonus. Buff that class already.
I won't argue using penalties as a con in a game, I always thought it was a poor way to balance.
Classes shouldn't be tit for tat balanced equally to each other, if that is the goal, better to make a single class that can do everything as you can't balance like that (which is why every game that tries ends up with homogenized classes).
That said, you can have pro/con based aspects to a class that give strengths and weaknesses. For instance, the racial bonuses or abilities in EQ allowed some classes to see in the dark while others could not. That is an advantage, but exp I don't think was a good con. They need to have actual cons to the race that makes a person weight the benefit of such a choice. and that con should always be something that exists throughout the game.
It is like that one discussion we had about character strengths and weaknesses. You could have a very strong race like an ogre but make them clumsy and to offset some special strength ability or mechanic they have, they could also have poor balance which occasionally based on numerous factors could cause them to trip from time to time.
Exp penalties became pointless when you reached cap. My point though was not if exp penalties were the right thing to put in as a con, but that it was already in and they eventually removed it giving people a free pass for that balance while still retaining the negative aspects of other races (ie they could see in the dark, had special regen, etc... and as a human I was blind as a bat in the dark, but had a bonus to exp). When they removed the exp penalties/bonuses, there was no longer any balance and races like humans got the short end of the stick.
I thought the removing of the penalties was a huge slap to the face in EQ when they initially did it.
I think xp penalties are crazy stupid.
If you feel the need to give a class a xp penalty, its obviously overpowered and need to be NERFED ASAP.
Same for a xp bonus. Buff that class already.
Exp penalties became pointless when you reached cap. My point though was not if exp penalties were the right thing to put in as a con, but that it was already in and they eventually removed it giving people a free pass for that balance while still retaining the negative aspects of other races (ie they could see in the dark, had special regen, etc... and as a human I was blind as a bat in the dark, but had a bonus to exp). When they removed the exp penalties/bonuses, there was no longer any balance and races like humans got the short end of the stick.
I wouldn't say they were pointless per se. When I was raiding VP, I had to spend several hours a week XPing just to make up for the xp you would lose from wipes, etc. Especially as a monk. I had one raid night where I lost 13% xp, and all of those were 96% resses.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
Then you sir were a very bad monk. Lol ok maybe not bad, but I was able to pull just about any dragon in VP in tandem with another monk to any place in VP without dying just about ever.
Then you sir were a very bad monk. Lol ok maybe not bad, but I was able to pull just about any dragon in VP in tandem with another monk to any place in VP without dying just about ever.
Had nothing to do with pulling. Had to do with multiple wipes because we were doing VP with 24 people.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
Comments
5. Screw balance, there is enough of that in the real world. I agree whole heartedly with your number 5.
8. A group and solo combo system similar to FFXI.
9. Native Controller support option.
For example if I would design a PvP game, I would start with say 5 classes and make sure every class in general wins against 2 other classes and in general loses against the other 2. Then I'd try to tweek to make all differences smaller, give each class countermeasures to the weaknesses the two superior classes exploit, ideally until if everyone plays perfect, the chances of everyone against everyone is 50:50, though obviously ultimately thats impossible.
What should be avoided is the situation that for example everyone can kill a Cleric and the Rogue slaughters everybody else, as I've seen it in Lineage 2.
Perfect balance of course is impossible. But if another class has an advantage over your own class, your class has to have an advantage over the other class.
I also really love the array of classes we got so far for Pantheon:
Warrior
Crusader (Paladin)
Dire Lord (Shadow Knight / Dread Knight)
Rogue
Ranger
Monk
Cleric
Shaman
Druid (possibly this time around a full healer class ? Would make sense, for symmetry reasons)
Wizard
Summoner (EQ Mage; VG has no equivalent)
Enchanter (VG called them Psionicist)
Thats Vanguard classes, but all classes from VG that have been unbalanced (Bard as the total OP group class, Necromancer and Disciple as the total OP solists) have been removed and the Summoner as specialized pet class added.
The only issue is, if we have a Pentinity Tank-Healer-PhysDD-MagicDD-CC, we are still a bit short on classes. The tanks, healers, PhysDD and MagicDD are obvious, but the only CC class is Enchanter.
And its doubtful that they changed the nature of the classes fundamentally - for example in Lineage 2 the Rogue had a ***load of CC.
A better way is to just create classes each with a unique purpose and very general balancing, then to make them work well together so that the synergy of all 5 classes is more powerful than having multiples of the rest.
Some classes just shouldn't be able to kill most other classes in a 1v1, period. Not in a multiplayer game where teamwork, interdependence and class diversity is important.
I think mainstreams solution was to make every class basically the same because they didn't want to hurt peoples delicate egos. Even then, people still found was to whine about the game.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
There are no longer any class experience penalties
For historical purposes, these used to be the penalties:
Paladin / Shadowknight / Ranger / Bard -40%
Monk -20%
Wizard / Magician / Enchanter / Necromancer -10%
Rogue +9%
Warrior +10%
But, in addition to that, P1999 is going to be quicker by the nature of the game being familiar. Everyone knows the good exp spots, knows the classes, skills, etc.
But yeah, I'd agree with Hrimnir, even with those scenarios he listed and a modified exp curve, as long as Pantheon is releasing expansions and not timelocked - the people getting power leveled will simply get to max level and move on, it's only a bigger issue on P1999 as there are a lot of people with not a lot to do (I haven't played since Velious was released though so maybe it's better now).
Agreed with his point on balance as well, but, I still think you'll have classes whining regardless.
You are correct that it will be faster due to more familiarity. But where you are making the mistake is that the amount of XP needed to level is identical. Its just that we are more proficient and efficient at gaining XP than we may have during original EQ.
https://www.project1999.com/forums/showthread.php?t=211758
January 2001 - Era has been enabled:
- Class XP Penalties have been removed.
- Group XP is no longer averaged to compensate for XP Modifiers (Class Bonuses, Racial Bonuses/Penalties).
- Root and Movement Speed type effects will now stack.
- Blue Diamond jewelry is now craftable. Previous pieces of Blue Diamond jewelry which were statless abbreviations should now function properly.
- Guardian Trekolz now spawns in Skyshrine.
Edit: Just FYI i wasn't intending to be insulting, just to point out timeframes. When most of us that did play P99 played it, we leveled with the XP penalties, just like "back in the day"Edit 2: Who gives a shit, let them whine. We got to where we are because of caving to whiners. If they don't like, no one is forcing them to play it.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
Hey Brad, I can't remember because this was at the time where you guys were moving on, but was this a decision you and your team made about exp penalties? It doesn't sound like it, as I remember you going head to head with many people on the forum for features in your "Vision" back in the day, which was nice to see as companies these days all kiss the ass of the players, even if they are wrong.
I remember people whining about paladins being worthless, but completely ignoring they could do some tanking, could do some minor support heal (or oh shit healing), and provide some DPS. That was ridiculously useful in groups, but some people wanted all the hybrid abilities and then to compete with primary classes (the beginning of the homogenization problem).
Now whether exp penalties was the right "con" for such a design, that I won't argue, but man it really pissed me off back then when they removed all those penalties (racial as well). I was a human monk, seeing in the dark was a MAJOR problem back then, but... other races had penalties so it balanced out. When they removed them, being a human with no night site was all bad and no good. It was my first experience of catering to the whines (because people whined like crazy about the penalties, especially during the hell levels).
One thing Pantheon better really pay attention to is not to implement features with pros/cons and then remove them later because of tantrums. That is a crappy thing to do in a game such as this.
I tried to explain this to a SK player one day in EQ who was whining about it. I pointed out all the special things that he could do that each of the main classes couldn't. He didn't care, because he wasn't the best tank or the best DPS, there was a flaw in the class.
Now if you said "why don't you paly a warrior if you want to be such a great tank?" and the response was... "What? and lose all these abilities (pets, self heals, snares, fears, etc...)". They just didn't get it.
Luckily it looks like they will try to get it out for release but if not the 1st expansion.
Also, there are those times you want to just log in and fool around solo.
My ideal Pantheon would have solo content and dungeons /raids requiring group play.
Nobody says you can't solo either. Just don't expect it to cater to it. Just like EQ, there is likely to be some classes that can solo fairly well for those who figure out how to skillful do it.
No solo content here. If that is your interest, your "ideal" game is elsewhere and there are plenty of them, PM me if you would like a very long list of games that will cater to your every solo desire!
I have to disagree with you though on the removal. I remember my friend calling me and telling me they did that, i played a paladin, and i was literally overjoyed. Back then the penalties did FAR more harm than the bonuses. Paladins for example had a 40% xp cut, that means it literally took me almost 2x as long to level as the baseline. However, best case scenario the people who had the bonuses were maybe 15% faster than the norm.
The reason why it was a good thing is because when you grouped, those negatives got split into the group XP. So a group who had a warrior as a tank would get a crapton more XP then the Paladin or SK. It became a lead weight attached to out ankles and it made it VERY difficult to get groups because back then, if someone was in a group with a hybrid, that meant they were getting 5-10% less XP than they would with a warrior, etc.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
I.e. you can pick any tank class, and its as good as their peers. Same for healers.
The main issue with Vanguard Bards was that solo they've not been much (high runspeed but mediocre ranged dps), but in group they've been almost godlike - very high dps (rivaled Rogues and Sorcerers, really), buffs the group damage drastically (like a flat 60% increase and thats not counting other buffs on top of that), and on top of that the second best CC class after Psionicist (i.e. Vanguard Enchanter).
Thus I sure hope they tone the Bards down in Pantheon.
If you feel the need to give a class a xp penalty, its obviously overpowered and need to be NERFED ASAP.
Same for a xp bonus. Buff that class already.
Classes shouldn't be tit for tat balanced equally to each other, if that is the goal, better to make a single class that can do everything as you can't balance like that (which is why every game that tries ends up with homogenized classes).
That said, you can have pro/con based aspects to a class that give strengths and weaknesses. For instance, the racial bonuses or abilities in EQ allowed some classes to see in the dark while others could not. That is an advantage, but exp I don't think was a good con. They need to have actual cons to the race that makes a person weight the benefit of such a choice. and that con should always be something that exists throughout the game.
It is like that one discussion we had about character strengths and weaknesses. You could have a very strong race like an ogre but make them clumsy and to offset some special strength ability or mechanic they have, they could also have poor balance which occasionally based on numerous factors could cause them to trip from time to time.
Exp penalties became pointless when you reached cap. My point though was not if exp penalties were the right thing to put in as a con, but that it was already in and they eventually removed it giving people a free pass for that balance while still retaining the negative aspects of other races (ie they could see in the dark, had special regen, etc... and as a human I was blind as a bat in the dark, but had a bonus to exp). When they removed the exp penalties/bonuses, there was no longer any balance and races like humans got the short end of the stick.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche