Class overbalance...

Comments

• Kanth Member Posts: 13

  July 2004

  I believe that one of the biggest humps that a lot of us may be having trouble getting over is to stop thinking of the classes in EQ2 in terms of classes with a shared tile from EQ. The entire reasoning behind this "overbalancing" is actually the opposite of what it may seem at first glance, they do not what to trivialize any one sub-class, therefore the biggest decision you will have to make for your character will be the archetype.

  Say for the sake of argument you have a hankerin' to be a healer, so of course you will pick the priest archetype. Then further down the road, when it came time to pick a class, you are free to make your choice solely on player preference, because the weight of "well I may not find groups as a healer if I am X class and not Y class" will have no bearing whatsoever. Finally, a bit further down the road you will have sub-class choice, and once again you make your decision based on how *you* want your character to turn out. All they have done here is given the player freedom of choice (btw there are only 24 classes; they are actually sub-classes if you like to split hairs) without the burden of having to pick the "best" at; tanking, healing, DPS, etc.

  Now I can most definitely see where concern may set in, with everyone being equal where the flavor of the different classes does and sub-classes really shine through? It makes it hard to point of specific class abilities when so little actual information has been released. It has been stated that no matter how evenly matched the classes and sub-classes were to one another under the same archetype, that each sub-class would have at a combat ability or spell which no one else in the game would have access to. Now what these abilities and spells might be for each of the sub-classes, your guess is as good as mine, speculation is half the fun, but at least it goes to show that Sony has this issue on their radar. I doubt that we will be looking at a game come launch with four basic classes with 24 creative names.

  
  -Kanth
• zcandymanz Member Posts: 113

  July 2004

  I don't like the way the classes appear to be going either, seems too much like horizons with the basic four classes. Also the fact that all classes are available to every race kind of urks me too, I don't like the option of high elf shaman its an oxy moron(i think thats what its called anyways).

  I just hope the classes become very distinct, for example: swashbuckler and brigand seem almost the exactly the same and i know they are both rogue types but i hope that they will have some m major differences.

  <"Oh lets call him George W."

  -Hilary Clinton
• Doogin Member Posts: 4

  July 2004

  The only thing that makes sense to me is we are getting information based on 50 lvls. The game is designed for 200 lvls. Being lvl 50 in eq2 is the equvilent of being lvl 16 in eq. At lvl 16 priests are basically the same. And most "fighter" classes can tank. Hopefully through the progression of the game to higher content and added levels. SOE will make the subclasses different and excel in different areas and bring a uniqueness to the subclass's. Such as Guardian > Monk for tanking high end mobs.  Example: Guardian should have a super taunt to hold the mob...but offer very little dps. Whereas the monk should pump out some dps but take alot more damage when hit. I don't mind the idea of subclasses sharing some abilities. But every class should be the best at something different and not be able to perform the same actions equally.

   

  ps: 24 subclasses not 48 my bad....was on a roll....
• gaeria84 Member Posts: 105

  July 2004

  Hmm let me see... 40+ classes? Expect severe balancing issues and redundant hybrid classes......

  *anticipating WoW*

  *anticipating WoW*
• Kanth Member Posts: 13

  July 2004

  Luckly, for all who have done their homework (or at least read half this thread), they know we won't have to worry about +40 classes. *rejoice*

  *anticipating intelligent posts*

  -Kanth
• zcandymanz Member Posts: 113

  July 2004

  I think its misrepresenting the game when SOE says 40 classes, there are only 24 real classes in my opinion, 4 starting classes and 12 intermediates which goto the 24 classes that will last more than 15 hours.

  <"Oh lets call him George W."

  -Hilary Clinton
• Instatious Member UncommonPosts: 7

  July 2004

  Let's hope this class system doesn't turn out like Horizons where almost every class was exactly the same with perhaps a different method.

  I think for the most part the biggest class distinction will be in the sub-class chosen at level 10. The class specialization at level 20 looks like it will only slightly decide how you play your character, of course depending on which sub-class you chose. Obviously choosing between a Shadowknight and a Paladin will have a larger impact than choosing between a Swashbuckler and Brigand.

  However, your specialty class decision can cause your faction alignment to change. Say you are a High Elf Summoner living in Qeynos, when you hit level 20 if you choose to be a Necromancer, you will have to become evil and gain faction to enter your new town of Freeport. At least, that's what I believe to be true based on what I've read.

  But like I said, I think the sub-class will be the most distinguishing feature of any class (not including archetypes which obviously will be very different) because the specialty classes look like they will only slightly change the way you play your character.
• MountainDew Member Posts: 119

  July 2004

  k gaeria, flame EQ2 cause u only played Warcraft games.

  Playing - CoH and EQ
  Waiting On - EQ2, WoW, and GW

  Let Go of My Eggo Bitch!
• wesd77 Member Posts: 2

  July 2004

  I'm guessing that they want to make grouping easier for one thing. I like the idea that I can grab a damage dealing fighter if need be, knowing he can somewhat tank, instead of waiting forever for an sk or pally to be available to group. On the other hand, in no way should a monk be able to tank like a gaurdian. I'm sure SoE knows that and i hope it works out.
• CerebralM Member Posts: 21

  July 2004

  Ok I'm going to stick my nose into this bussiness alittle more. EQ2 is trying to make a game where all archetype sub-types can fullfill their respective roles in an exp group to the same degree of effectiveness. To me, this is a most wonderful idea! It means no one is left out of exp groups and no one is going to end up getting passed over just because " this class can take one less hit than this class so lets ignore his tell " type of grouping. The real test of the class balance is going to be end game raid content where a Guardian, which is already obviously the best tank in the game is going to be needed to really take the hits in a large scale confrontation. This will be the same for a cleric, who has the FASTEST heals... which, now that cheals have been taken out of the game is going to be used as a primary healer on raids where healing immediately is going to be of a primary concern. with 24 end classes and a 24 person max raid number, I see it as no coincidence that you are going to need a variety of classes to contribute to a successful raid in different ways, but thats just my opinion.
• Docthart Member Posts: 34

  July 2004

  Very simple to understand. EQ1 became a game where you had to have a Cleric, and a buffer/debuffer in a group. For the most part anyway. If you can think back, try to remember looking for a cleric or chanter or shaman to finish your group. Sure other classes could heal, but compared toa  cleric they were aweful at it. More so in the higher levels. They arnt saying you wont need a healer and stuff, just that you can do well with say a druid or other healer type. It actualy makes the game more appealing becuase It seems people wont be wasting so much time looking for a specific class. Key point as stated before is you gotta get the old Classes out of your head. Although they are a remake, they will play different now. Atleast I really hope they do like Eq says.