I liked the AA system from Everquest, as it provided a reason and way (other than raiding or camping for loot drops) to still progress and group despite being max level. WoW, instead, did the daily quests for grinding faction or dungeon finder for getting tokens. While that got people in to play and possibly group, I found it much more limiting. (1) You needed to play in specific areas doing specific things, while you could grind AAs anywhere in the world, so could explore different areas or stay within your favorite zone, whatever you wanted. (2) The faction or tokens were typically for gear that would be replaced by raid gear, while AAs were something in addition to any gains from raiding.
Well, I would be OK with AA's if there would be reasonable limits.
For example, Tricksters and Mages with tank-like defenses aint so fun.
Now I dont know what Pantheon will do, but in Vanguard, what I think was the case was:
Mages capped at 10% damage mitigation
Fighters capped at 45% damage mitigation
Tanks capped at 65% damage mitigation
I'm only sure about Mage and Tank, though. Maybe Fighters got only 40% ? Or 50% ? I also dont remember how my Cleric capped, I think it was 50% ? Or maybe 55% ?
Anyway, now if AAs would be built on top of that, I could see that they could add:
Mage: +20% MIT (30% instead of 10% max) Everyone else: +10% MIT (Tanks jump from 65% to 75%, Fighters from 45% to 55% etc)
Assuming one gains 1 AA per hour in normal adventuring, one could get:
8 AA = +1% MIT (1 day a 8 hours playtime) 16 AA = +2% MIT (2 days) 32 AA = +3% MIT (4 days) 64 AA = +4% MIT (8 days) 128 AA = +5% MIT (16 days) 256 AA = +6% MIT (32 days) 512 AA = +7% MIT (64 days) 1024 AA = +8% MIT (128 days) 2048 AA = +9% MIT (256 days / approx 1 year hardcore playtime) 4096 AA = +10% MIT (512 days / cap / approx 2 year hardcore playtime)
Mages would get double bonus.
Also of course that would be only one stat ... very likely there would be more, like:
Evasion: +10% Block for Tank and Cleric and Shaman, +10% Parry for Fighter, +20% Dodge for Mage Damage: +60% for tanks, +20% for everyone else Critical Hit Chance: +10% for tanks, +20% for everyone else
That would total to 8 years of gaming, I would dare to say its quite safe to assume that even the most hardcore gamers wont hit these caps too quickly.
Well, I would be OK with AA's if there would be reasonable limits.
For example, Tricksters and Mages with tank-like defenses aint so fun.
Now I dont know what Pantheon will do, but in Vanguard, what I think was the case was:
Mages capped at 10% damage mitigation
Fighters capped at 45% damage mitigation
Tanks capped at 65% damage mitigation
I'm only sure about Mage and Tank, though. Maybe Fighters got only 40% ? Or 50% ? I also dont remember how my Cleric capped, I think it was 50% ? Or maybe 55% ?
Anyway, now if AAs would be built on top of that, I could see that they could add:
Mage: +20% MIT (30% instead of 10% max) Everyone else: +10% MIT (Tanks jump from 65% to 75%, Fighters from 45% to 55% etc)
Assuming one gains 1 AA per hour in normal adventuring, one could get:
8 AA = +1% MIT (1 day a 8 hours playtime) 16 AA = +2% MIT (2 days) 32 AA = +3% MIT (4 days) 64 AA = +4% MIT (8 days) 128 AA = +5% MIT (16 days) 256 AA = +6% MIT (32 days) 512 AA = +7% MIT (64 days) 1024 AA = +8% MIT (128 days) 2048 AA = +9% MIT (256 days / approx 1 year hardcore playtime) 4096 AA = +10% MIT (512 days / cap / approx 2 year hardcore playtime)
Mages would get double bonus.
Also of course that would be only one stat ... very likely there would be more, like:
Evasion: +10% Block for Tank and Cleric and Shaman, +10% Parry for Fighter, +20% Dodge for Mage Damage: +60% for tanks, +20% for everyone else Critical Hit Chance: +10% for tanks, +20% for everyone else
That would total to 8 years of gaming, I would dare to say its quite safe to assume that even the most hardcore gamers wont hit these caps too quickly.
I don't think any cloth casters (unless specifically relevant as a core class design) should be able to gain mitigation/avoidance outside of magical items. They focus on the intellectual studies of the arcane, naturally due to this they are limited physically. This also gives balance to game play.
I mean, if we are going to allow a mage to learn defensive physical abilities, are we going to allow the warrior to learn some arcane abilities and cast some spells? I think those basic roles should be kept to their pro/cons. Last thing I want to see is the fiasco that EQ created by allowing casters to have physical AAs that completely skewed everything. I am not arguing from a position of balance class to class, but role to role and cloth casters should never have any advantage or skill in avoiding or mitigating physical attacks outside of magic.
As for your progression, I really am not sure about it. One thing that bothers me is it looks like one long arduous grind, and for what? You are essentially establishing a powers of 2 progression system for each percent of increase? Look at the risk/reward. Your progression is exponentially driven risk (ie massive time effort), with little reward?
What is likely to happen is that most would put in about 16-32 days effort to it and then forget the rest as the percent difference of that nature will only be viable under a long term parse. That is, whatever can be done with 10% mitigation can also be done with 5-6% mitigation when we consider damage taken, healing chains, etc... so it would be wasted time to even chase the carrot.
One of the things that differentiated time spend in EQ vs that of many Asian MMOs like Lineage and the like was that the reward for effort was well worth it. A system with extreme effort and diminishing returns is definitely not something EQ was known for. That sort of "grind" was something that turned off most of my fellow EQ players.
Grinds must exist, it is the nature of any real progression system game of worth, but it has to be hidden behind "meaningful" effort and reward or it is just pointless time wasting all too common in the "end game" grinds of mainstream games today.
Well yeah, diminishing returns is the general idea. Its supposed to be the last step of progression of the game, after all, even after raid loot.
And besides, 75% instead of 65% MIT would have been a HUGE deal on a tank in Vanguard. Thats the difference between the healers throwing all at you they have to keep you alife, or the healers having OOM problems. Or the difference between the healers having OOM problems and them being able to keep up their mana regeneration rotation to keep both you and their mana up high.
I am generally in favor of AAs -- I agree with some of the other posters -- the more ways you can build up your character, focus on advancing him in different ways, the better. That said, at times they can be too repetitive -- I feel the same way about factions -- I think factions are great, but 'faction grinding' can be taken too far and should be handled with care. I remember the very night we sat in the conference room talking about EQ expansions, raising the level cap, and brainstorming ways we could give players something to do in terms of character development other than just gaining experience -- that night, AAs were born.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------- Brad McQuaid CCO, Visionary Realms, Inc. www.pantheonmmo.com --------------------------------------------------------------
I like the AA system of EQ. The only thing I didn't like is that you could buy every single AA, so you end up with rogue A, having the exact same 9000 AA of rogue B. I would have preferred, if you could spec into defense or offense, even a little bit, and that only 8000 of the 9000 AA were similar, that you somehow were forced to think about your AA, instead of just farming them and everyone ending up the exact same character. (you could spec into casting mastery, but that was about the only thing)
After a while, AA farming got boring, it were always the same AA getting increased ranks, and the larger the AA pool, the smaller the difference. Combat Agility went from being like 10% per rank, to like 0.3% or something.
There should have been more collectible AA tied to raids and flags too. The DoN AA system with different ranks was great, but it was only done for one expansion.
I am generally in favor of AAs -- I agree with some of the other posters -- the more ways you can build up your character, focus on advancing him in different ways, the better. That said, at times they can be too repetitive -- I feel the same way about factions -- I think factions are great, but 'faction grinding' can be taken too far and should be handled with care. I remember the very night we sat in the conference room talking about EQ expansions, raising the level cap, and brainstorming ways we could give players something to do in terms of character development other than just gaining experience -- that night, AAs were born.
Faction grinding in the vein of what WoW did, particularly during BC. Is stupid. However, one of the things i really loved about EQ is if you wanted to do something ridiculous, like kill enough high elves to get your faction with dark elves up to the point you could walk into the dark elf city as a human paladin (or pick something, whatever)... you could. It was never required or "implied required" as it was in WoW, where if you wanted this particular item, welp, better spend the next 2 weeks killing the same stupid mobs 500 times an hour for 8 hours a day.
But, if someone "wanted" to something that assinine (i.e. the high elf, dark elf example), they could.
"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."
I like the AA system of EQ. The only thing I didn't like is that you could buy every single AA, so you end up with rogue A, having the exact same 9000 AA of rogue B. I would have preferred, if you could spec into defense or offense, even a little bit, and that only 8000 of the 9000 AA were similar, that you somehow were forced to think about your AA, instead of just farming them and everyone ending up the exact same character. (you could spec into casting mastery, but that was about the only thing)
After a while, AA farming got boring, it were always the same AA getting increased ranks, and the larger the AA pool, the smaller the difference. Combat Agility went from being like 10% per rank, to like 0.3% or something.
There should have been more collectible AA tied to raids and flags too. The DoN AA system with different ranks was great, but it was only done for one expansion.
Agreed. I'd much rather see some variation or a skill tree approach to AAs.
There should have been a faction indicator outside of a /con. I don't know which expansion it was, but a fairly recent one, and people lost their mind about not having a faction indicator, not knowing what your faction is, when it is an intrinsic part of being able to gain access to certain items, annoyed so many people.
I would have preferred, [...] that you somehow were forced to
think about your AA, instead of just farming them and everyone ending up
the exact same character. [...]
Hey, thats a great idea ! Have a general limit to AA, so you have to chose into what you want to invest.
So if you would for example have 10 kinds of stats you could invest in (like the aforementioned mitigation, evasion, damage and critical hit chance) and the max is say 2,000 in each, but you can only spent like 5,000 total, so you have to choose what you want to focus into.
I would also like to point out that I wouldnt want to see farming of AA at all. In my mind, AA is what you get during normal exploration, quests, raiding and other such occupations (crafting ? harvesting ? diplomacy? fishing?), not through dull mass killing of mobs. Its OK if mobs drop AA as well, but I would want killing of mobs to be the slowest way to gain AA, just like gaining XP should be much more efficient with quests.
There should have been a faction indicator outside of a /con. I don't know which expansion it was, but a fairly recent one, and people lost their mind about not having a faction indicator, not knowing what your faction is, when it is an intrinsic part of being able to gain access to certain items, annoyed so many people.
That just goes to show you how far removed the modern MMO is from the RPG. They aren't even trying to keep up the facade any longer, real player choices and the open ended nature of MMOs are a thing of the past.
I actually prefer the idea that, unlike modern talent trees, if you spent the time you could get all the AAs. Unlike the equipment grind at max level, the AAs continued to be useful under any new expansion and level cap. I consider a talent-tree system an entirely different beast. Once you start adding caps or limitations, you really need to include the ability to respec. With AAs, if you make a mistake, it isn't limiting in any way.
Modern talent speccing is used in two ways, which are quite different from AAs: (1) enable Tank or Healer classes to switch to a DPS role instead (both to encourage more people to roll tanks and healers and to enable the rare instance when you have too many), and (2) a way of pretending there are more classes than there really are. "Oh, we have Frost Wizard and Fire Wizards and Arcane Wizards, that's like three different classes! Though you can switch between them by sitting down for 5 seconds." If Pantheon limits the memorized spells, you already get that, memorize Fire for the fights against snow monsters, and Ice for the fights against fire monster. Or memorize spells to be the Arcane or AoE Wizard.
Well, respeccing AAs should definitely be possible. Just like respeccing stats, and retraining skills. It just should require some kind of effort, just like in the other cases.
I would assume that raising the maxlevel will also increase the maximum caps of AA.
Meaning if maxlevel raises say from 50 to 60, but you dont spent any more AA on say hitpoints which you had capped at 50 but have hit 60, you will still get as much additional hitpoints from AA as you got with level 50, but it will be less than the maximum you could get if you maxed AA on that again.
Respeccing classes as in WoW is to me exactly as lazy a solution as for example
instancing.
Instancing for me breaks the experience of living in a virtual world
with hundreds or even thousands of other players which can meet me
anywhere in this world.
And respeccing classes for me breaks the
experience of chosing a certain role. I definitely dont want to be asked on a Cleric to be DD, or on a Paladin to be group healer, etc. Even less do I want to play a Cleric as a DD, only switching to healer when the group asks me to. Whats the point of that, anyway ? I wouldnt have learned to be a healer beforehand. And even in WoW a "real" DD class would deal more damage.
Sure I dont mind subclasses, but they shouldnt change your class around completely to something different. It was certainly fun to be Death Cleric in Vanguard, but I wasnt a DD class this way, not even remotely. I could fearkite and I had probably more dps than any other cleric, but any actual DD class could still outclass me by far.
And I repeat - Vanguard managed to have plenty of healers and also quite a number of tanks simply by making healers and tanks fun to play. I prefer this a LOT over the WoW scheme.
So I both assume as well as hope that Pantheon will strive to keep all classes in their respective party roles, just like Vanguard. You chose being Crusader - you'll be tank. Exclusively.
Meaning for example a Cleric will never be a tank, and a Paladin (well,
Crusader) will never be a healer, no matter how they spent their AA,
even if AA might make them better offtanks and better emergency healers,
respectively.
Do you want to see this make the list of Pantheon? I hope it does, I loved the endless content it gave to my char. In a sense I could almost become epic on a level that people would get to know you by name. I loved having guilds fight over me because of what I could bring to a raid over some casual gamer that didnt take the time to round out their char. Maybe its an outdated system with MMOs focusing so much on casual players. What do you think?
I think an AA system can add another layer to the sophistication of Pantheon. However, in Everquest today, people are running instances and getting close to 100 AAs in around 30 minutes. You can imagine that it does not take long until a lot of players have all the AAs.
I would much rather see an AA system that allows you to branch out into different specializations. This way your character can be somewhat more unique. Maybe have the AAs granted based on something other than just killing mobs.
I think ideally you want to have many different systems that offer different kinds of experiences. This way hopefully there is always something you feel like working on and always have something you could be doing to further improve your character.
Well, respeccing AAs should definitely be possible. Just like respeccing stats, and retraining skills. It just should require some kind of effort, just like in the other cases.
This I am adamantly against this. Respecing invalidates the effort of choice and selection a player makes while leveling up. Its design was a streamlined solution that many mainstream games started to implement because by doing so, they could have limited skill content and then provide flexible means for a player to adjust their play style anytime they liked. It leads to a pigeon hole style system of design that is dependent on limited options to faciltate the game play of choice between the selection. Then you get into the whole "Tree" style design of play and we are back to WoW development focus. WoWs limited tree based system is in my opinion one of the worst things about MMOs these days. It is what leads to constant complaints about different builds and selections being more powerful than the other, the cookie cutter tantrum arguments, etc... It is the essence of mainstream design.
Here is the thing. If you make the effort equal to obtaining the AA, then why bother with the respec? Just earn the AAs you want. If the point is that it would take too long to work for a line of other AAs, well... the argument then becomes that it should be easier to change focus, which... this invalidates the effort of the person who spent the time planning out what type of focus they wanted. That player who doesn't like the choice then wants to be able to chase the "flavor of the week" AAs because someone found out some benefit of working a certain number of AAs together.
While I disagreed with your long arduous AA design, it wasn't because it had a linear one time acquisition progression that bothered me, it was the effort vs reward due to its extreme diminishing returns for the value it gave in the AA on the latter side of the progression. An AA point should always be of the same value. It is demoralizing to have your money devalue as you get closer to your goal as it is a cheap gimmick, a cheat in the players eyes. It is like changing the conditions of an agreement every time someone is about to meet those conditions.
If the worry is that people will gain all the AAs, then you design AAs to be in sufficient number and acquisition rate to last the expected consummation rate of content. This will give a healthy and worthy carrot for the player to chase, but not gimmick them. They will still have a very long grind, but it will be even and expected, not cheapened with diminishing returns. This will also give great value to those who choose different routes in their character building over others as they are building their character. While all classes could eventually have all the same AAs, due to the acquisition rate, few if any will have them all, and many will have different focuses with the pros/cons of such development decisions.
What this does is eliminate the "flavor of the week" type designs because players won't be able to quickly switch up their AAs if they see someone else find a clever combination of use. It rewards clever design, careful planning and skill in learning ones class. People will still be able to achieve that eventual design, but they will then have to work at the AAs to obtain it. Respecing is a convenience that disregards that consequence in development.
Well, respeccing AAs should definitely be possible. Just like respeccing stats, and retraining skills. It just should require some kind of effort, just like in the other cases.
This I am adamantly against this. Respecing invalidates the effort of choice and selection a player makes while leveling up. Its design was a streamlined solution that many mainstream games started to implement because by doing so, they could have limited skill content and then provide flexible means for a player to adjust their play style anytime they liked. It leads to a pigeon hole style system of design that is dependent on limited options to faciltate the game play of choice between the selection. Then you get into the whole "Tree" style design of play and we are back to WoW development focus. WoWs limited tree based system is in my opinion one of the worst things about MMOs these days. It is what leads to constant complaints about different builds and selections being more powerful than the other, the cookie cutter tantrum arguments, etc... It is the essence of mainstream design.
<snip for brevity>
Respecs do indeed undermine the choices the character made as part of their growth. Choices are supposed to be relatively permanent. Decisions at all levels enhance the game experience.
But respecs may be necessary due to other factors, such as the game design changing. That can make a rather specific impact on decisions already made.
Example (from EQ1): The enchanter class was initially described as a 'master of crafting', and was the only really viable way to become a jeweler. No other class got the Jewelry Mastery AAs. Then, everyone could get the Jewelry Mastery AAs, the exclusivity of the Enchanter-as-jeweler was gone. But Shaman can still work Alchemy, and Gnomes still have their Tinkering skill, and retain exclusive skill-related AAs.
Here, the game changed, making the initial decision to invest in Jewelry Mastery less appealing. Yes, there was a partial refund of the AAs spent, but the exclusivity incentive was gone.
How would I have approached a situation where game changes modify the factors that went into the initial decision (changed functionality, better option, changed desirability, etc)? I would have created a Respec ability available from an in-world NPC. This Respec NPC would be available only for a limited time beyond the change, maybe a month. This ability would refund all spent AAs, but have some steep cost (or costs) -- some substantial number of AAs (not refunded in the total AAs returned), loss of a character level, and permanent loss of stats, HP/Mana, or faction. This makes the Respec a serious decision in itself, forcing players to judge their degree of dissatisfaction.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Well, I would be OK with AA's if there would be reasonable limits.
For example, Tricksters and Mages with tank-like defenses aint so fun.
Now I dont know what Pantheon will do, but in Vanguard, what I think was the case was:
Mages capped at 10% damage mitigation
Fighters capped at 45% damage mitigation
Tanks capped at 65% damage mitigation
I'm only sure about Mage and Tank, though. Maybe Fighters got only 40% ? Or 50% ? I also dont remember how my Cleric capped, I think it was 50% ? Or maybe 55% ?
Anyway, now if AAs would be built on top of that, I could see that they could add:
Mage: +20% MIT (30% instead of 10% max) Everyone else: +10% MIT (Tanks jump from 65% to 75%, Fighters from 45% to 55% etc)
Assuming one gains 1 AA per hour in normal adventuring, one could get:
8 AA = +1% MIT (1 day a 8 hours playtime) 16 AA = +2% MIT (2 days) 32 AA = +3% MIT (4 days) 64 AA = +4% MIT (8 days) 128 AA = +5% MIT (16 days) 256 AA = +6% MIT (32 days) 512 AA = +7% MIT (64 days) 1024 AA = +8% MIT (128 days) 2048 AA = +9% MIT (256 days / approx 1 year hardcore playtime) 4096 AA = +10% MIT (512 days / cap / approx 2 year hardcore playtime)
Mages would get double bonus.
Also of course that would be only one stat ... very likely there would be more, like:
Evasion: +10% Block for Tank and Cleric and Shaman, +10% Parry for Fighter, +20% Dodge for Mage Damage: +60% for tanks, +20% for everyone else Critical Hit Chance: +10% for tanks, +20% for everyone else
That would total to 8 years of gaming, I would dare to say its quite safe to assume that even the most hardcore gamers wont hit these caps too quickly.
I don't think any cloth casters (unless specifically relevant as a core class design) should be able to gain mitigation/avoidance outside of magical items. They focus on the intellectual studies of the arcane, naturally due to this they are limited physically. This also gives balance to game play.
I mean, if we are going to allow a mage to learn defensive physical abilities, are we going to allow the warrior to learn some arcane abilities and cast some spells? I think those basic roles should be kept to their pro/cons. Last thing I want to see is the fiasco that EQ created by allowing casters to have physical AAs that completely skewed everything. I am not arguing from a position of balance class to class, but role to role and cloth casters should never have any advantage or skill in avoiding or mitigating physical attacks outside of magic.
As for your progression, I really am not sure about it. One thing that bothers me is it looks like one long arduous grind, and for what? You are essentially establishing a powers of 2 progression system for each percent of increase? Look at the risk/reward. Your progression is exponentially driven risk (ie massive time effort), with little reward?
What is likely to happen is that most would put in about 16-32 days effort to it and then forget the rest as the percent difference of that nature will only be viable under a long term parse. That is, whatever can be done with 10% mitigation can also be done with 5-6% mitigation when we consider damage taken, healing chains, etc... so it would be wasted time to even chase the carrot.
One of the things that differentiated time spend in EQ vs that of many Asian MMOs like Lineage and the like was that the reward for effort was well worth it. A system with extreme effort and diminishing returns is definitely not something EQ was known for. That sort of "grind" was something that turned off most of my fellow EQ players.
Grinds must exist, it is the nature of any real progression system game of worth, but it has to be hidden behind "meaningful" effort and reward or it is just pointless time wasting all too common in the "end game" grinds of mainstream games today.
Historically, casters have always had mitigation in the form of shield spells, ironskin, skin like wood, steelskin, prismatic shield, forcefield, ghost form, mist form, skin like stone...etc. AA's could improve the stats of those spells or offer better alternatives. In EQ, casters had no real advantages other than kiting, pets and self heals, all of which can be found in melee classes like the paladin, ranger, shadowknight and beastlord. You can argue burst damage vs damage over time, but they usually equaled out in the end.
Well, respeccing AAs should definitely be possible. Just like respeccing stats, and retraining skills. It just should require some kind of effort, just like in the other cases.
This I am adamantly against this. Respecing invalidates the effort of choice and selection a player makes while leveling up. Its design was a streamlined solution that many mainstream games started to implement because by doing so, they could have limited skill content and then provide flexible means for a player to adjust their play style anytime they liked. It leads to a pigeon hole style system of design that is dependent on limited options to faciltate the game play of choice between the selection. Then you get into the whole "Tree" style design of play and we are back to WoW development focus. WoWs limited tree based system is in my opinion one of the worst things about MMOs these days. It is what leads to constant complaints about different builds and selections being more powerful than the other, the cookie cutter tantrum arguments, etc... It is the essence of mainstream design.
<snip for brevity>
Respecs do indeed undermine the choices the character made as part of their growth. Choices are supposed to be relatively permanent. Decisions at all levels enhance the game experience.
But respecs may be necessary due to other factors, such as the game design changing. That can make a rather specific impact on decisions already made.
Example (from EQ1): The enchanter class was initially described as a 'master of crafting', and was the only really viable way to become a jeweler. No other class got the Jewelry Mastery AAs. Then, everyone could get the Jewelry Mastery AAs, the exclusivity of the Enchanter-as-jeweler was gone. But Shaman can still work Alchemy, and Gnomes still have their Tinkering skill, and retain exclusive skill-related AAs.
Here, the game changed, making the initial decision to invest in Jewelry Mastery less appealing. Yes, there was a partial refund of the AAs spent, but the exclusivity incentive was gone.
How would I have approached a situation where game changes modify the factors that went into the initial decision (changed functionality, better option, changed desirability, etc)? I would have created a Respec ability available from an in-world NPC. This Respec NPC would be available only for a limited time beyond the change, maybe a month. This ability would refund all spent AAs, but have some steep cost (or costs) -- some substantial number of AAs (not refunded in the total AAs returned), loss of a character level, and permanent loss of stats, HP/Mana, or faction. This makes the Respec a serious decision in itself, forcing players to judge their degree of dissatisfaction.
Yet those who specialized in such all the time while it was that way achieved that exclusivity. Nothing was taken away from them, their spec was not lost and the change didn't all of a sudden give players who did not have it all the AAs immediately as they still had to put in the work to improve it.
Allowing them to respec, now that would be a major slap to the face. For instance, lets say you focused on crafting heavily while I as an enchanter put a bunch of time into the adventure portion aspects of play. Now, because that line AAs is no longer restricted, no longer special to enchanters only, you decide... meh.. I don't want to do that anymore and take all of those points (hundreds of hours of effort) and drop them into the adventure portion AA, basically having your cake and eating it too. That is, you got to experience all the benefits of your initially AA design and exclusivity and then, when it was no longer special, you got to have everything I worked for invalidated with a respec.
Again, it is a cheat on the players who put the time in. Like I said, in no way was the player who spent on crafting put out, they got everything they put into it for the time they had it and even after the change, they still had use with it. That is not a valid reason for such. If someone wants other AAs, go out and earn them, that should be the option or it makes any effort put into them worthless.
Historically, casters have always had mitigation in the form of shield spells, ironskin, skin like wood, steelskin, prismatic shield, forcefield, ghost form, mist form, skin like stone...etc. AA's could improve the stats of those spells or offer better alternatives. In EQ, casters had no real advantages other than kiting, pets and self heals, all of which can be found in melee classes like the paladin, ranger, shadowknight and beastlord. You can argue burst damage vs damage over time, but they usually equaled out in the end.
Yes, but they were magically established and held to the rules of magic use which was governed by spell points, time limits, buff slot management, being dispelled, etc...
I am talking about the physical abilities to which casters had access to. Combat avoidance, Combat Stability, etc.. which were General types open to all classes. This gave casters avoidance and mitigation (as well as other increases with AAs that gave regen, etc...) on top of their spell uses and without any sort of requirement or restriction mechanism that existed with spell use.
Hmm well to start ,i never noticed any difference in what i could fight or how i fought,i felt the entire EQ..EQ2 systems were fake.
A short story now......I was playing had no AA,i was in some jungle/forest zone when i left the game,i do remember i was able to kill everything as i was leveling there and looting.I come back start loading up on AA's i struggled badly to kill the same stuff i had no AA's and was killing.My take on it was they somehow manipulated the numbers/stats to make AA's almost meaningless aside from a couple abilities but again those would last but a few seconds.
I found also they used timers that were just dumb,like everything was basically 1-2 second timers except perhaps 1-2 that might be longer.Also your buffs or debuffs didn't last long enough to barely complete a few attack abilities.This meant you were basically cycling only a few options even though i had like 5 hotbars full of choice.
In contrast when i played FFXI things just made more sense and the combat structure was just a lot better and it had no AA's.Example my buffs would actually last 30 seconds to several minutes,timers were longer because each ability was very effective.Also longer timers meant more choice selecting abilities/spells as well as you had to think a bit when to use something rather than just spam it over and over cycling through the same 3 abilities/spells.
Bottom line is i would not trade a single thing from FFXI combat design for anything from EQ combat.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Hmm well to start ,i never noticed any difference in what i could fight or how i fought,i felt the entire EQ..EQ2 systems were fake.
A short story now......I was playing had no AA,i was in some jungle/forest zone when i left the game,i do remember i was able to kill everything as i was leveling there and looting.I come back start loading up on AA's i struggled badly to kill the same stuff i had no AA's and was killing.My take on it was they somehow manipulated the numbers/stats to make AA's almost meaningless aside from a couple abilities but again those would last but a few seconds.
I found also they used timers that were just dumb,like everything was basically 1-2 second timers except perhaps 1-2 that might be longer.Also your buffs or debuffs didn't last long enough to barely complete a few attack abilities.This meant you were basically cycling only a few options even though i had like 5 hotbars full of choice.
In contrast when i played FFXI things just made more sense and the combat structure was just a lot better and it had no AA's.Example my buffs would actually last 30 seconds to several minutes,timers were longer because each ability was very effective.Also longer timers meant more choice selecting abilities/spells as well as you had to think a bit when to use something rather than just spam it over and over cycling through the same 3 abilities/spells.
Bottom line is i would not trade a single thing from FFXI combat design for anything from EQ combat.
When did you play EQ that you noticed this? Sounds like you played after the game was out for many years and they started dumbing down systems which created many issues as you noticed. In all of the time I played (up to around GoD), never did I see what you claimed. AA's mattered and some of them were significant power increases, especially if you got several lines maxed.
As for timers, the point is that in EQ, those were supposed to be situational timers, not like games today where people spam keys in twitch combat. there were some consistent cycle skills (monks had flying kick, tiger claw, etc...), but many had special uses so you didn't want to just mindlessly spam them (ie you waited to use as an interrupt to a caster casting). If you were a tank who cycled Taunt, you were kicked from the group because you were a horrible tank who didn't understand how Taunt worked and how hate lists worked in EQ.
While EQ abilities were a mix of good and bad, and certainly could use some improvements, the last thing you want to do is have the spamming face rolling combat of games today. Skill use should be situational, meaningful, not an arcade spam fest.
While FFXI had some interesting aspects and they should be open to ideas, keep in mind this is EQ/VG in nature, not FFXI, if you are looking for FFXI, this isn't the right game for you.
I like the AA system of EQ. The only thing I didn't like is that you could buy every single AA, so you end up with rogue A, having the exact same 9000 AA of rogue B. I would have preferred, if you could spec into defense or offense, even a little bit, and that only 8000 of the 9000 AA were similar, that you somehow were forced to think about your AA, instead of just farming them and everyone ending up the exact same character. (you could spec into casting mastery, but that was about the only thing)
After a while, AA farming got boring, it were always the same AA getting increased ranks, and the larger the AA pool, the smaller the difference. Combat Agility went from being like 10% per rank, to like 0.3% or something.
There should have been more collectible AA tied to raids and flags too. The DoN AA system with different ranks was great, but it was only done for one expansion.
I love this idea. One of my favorite parts of SWG was the leveling system. It was not a full blown sandbox open skill system where you could learn anything, but you had to decide to put your points into what you really wanted. Each tier you leveled to max (mastered) opened a new tier that was even more specialized. You also had a limited amount of overall points you could allocate in this system. I would LOVE to see an AA system tied into the conventional level system with this type of concept. It would feel like a whole new level system to work on that was full of meaningful variables that you could work on progressing at max. I'll keep my fingers crossed!
As for respec, they could follow the same system as SWG here as well. You can respec to get the points you want back, but you lose all the exp it took to level them if you do. It felt very punitive, but it made you really consider where your points went, and whether it was worth respeccing to change something. If/When people did respec in (early) SWG they could potentially throw out days or weeks worth of level time. I do think respec points are necessary in a system in which you have a limited number of AA/Skill points to spend. Unlike EQ AA's where you could learn all AAs, and if you made a bad choice it only amounted to the time wasted to purchase that AA, a system where your AA/Skill points are limited you could perma-gimp you character if respecs were not an option.
@ Sinist Actually if you are looking for FFXI pre Abyssea, this is the only game for you! And why Im supporting this game. FFXI and EQ had a lot in common, if nothing else in the "feel" of the game. There are plenty of differences, but off hand Id have a hard time thinking of any games similar to FFXI aside from EQ and maybe EQOA. And with FFXI going into maint mode soon, Id say you can expect more FFXI vets looking for something similar to old school XI.
Oh and dont let Wizardy bother you too much, he is a raving loon when it comes to XI. And while I do love FFXI and while I do not like the approach the XIV reboot took, Id like to think Im open to ideas outside of XI.
As to the topic at hand, I dont think choosing AAs would come down to being creative. All you can do is read a description, it might sound good but you have no idea of its actual effectiveness. Ive run into this where you spend into an AA and it ends up not being effective. Not because you planned poorly but because it just wasnt that good. Example: 1 AA says it reduces MP consumed and another says it increases Max MPs. Well either could be good but if they dont tell you by hard numbers or percentage, then you have no idea that the Max MPs is crap compared to the reduced consumption. Of course the simple fix for this is detailed descriptions to ensure your AA plans arent all "accidental". If things like this can be avoided then I have no problem with not being able to respec.
Are you asking for limits on which AAs you can take or only just not allowing respec (like if I take AA skill x I cant take AA skill y ever?)
Well, respeccing AAs should definitely be possible. Just like
respeccing stats, and retraining skills. It just should require some
kind of effort, just like in the other cases.
This I am adamantly against this.
I'm at least as adamantly for this.
You pick the general direction, like your characters name, gender, race, subrace, and class, at the very start of the game.
Everything else, like subclass, stats, skills, crafter class, harvesting skill choices etc should be changeable, even if it also should require an appropiate amount of effort.
AA clearly belongs very, very clearly to the second type of descisions. Changing your AAs should never result into an essentially different kind of gameplay. Thus AAs absolutley need to be respeccable.
Well, respeccing AAs should definitely be possible. Just like
respeccing stats, and retraining skills. It just should require some
kind of effort, just like in the other cases.
This I am adamantly against this.
I'm at least as adamantly for this.
You pick the general direction, like your characters name, gender, race, subrace, and class, at the very start of the game.
Everything else, like subclass, stats, skills, crafter class, harvesting skill choices etc should be changeable, even if it also should require an appropiate amount of effort.
AA clearly belongs very, very clearly to the second type of descisions. Changing your AAs should never result into an essentially different kind of gameplay. Thus AAs absolutley need to be respeccable.
Why? just earn more and fill them out. There is no reason to allow people to change. It is a cheat that flies in the face of those who planned for a certain progression. You don't like that you didn't plan and put points into a line or focus that didn't work out as you liked? Or... you want to change because you saw someone else worked up a nice result using a certain combination of AAs together. Fine.. earn up more experience and focus on it.
Wanting to be able to go "Opps, I like that better... umm... Do Over!" is pure mainstream garbage design and everything wrong with games today. It is flies in the face of those who paid attention, worked hard to develop a solid plan to achieve a result.
Look, nobody is saying you can't have those other AAs, they are saying... if you picked wrong, too bad, earn some more exp and pick better. What is wrong with that? Earn your AA's, don't expect to gimmick them with silly respec mechanics.
Comments
For example, Tricksters and Mages with tank-like defenses aint so fun.
Now I dont know what Pantheon will do, but in Vanguard, what I think was the case was:
Mages capped at 10% damage mitigation
Fighters capped at 45% damage mitigation
Tanks capped at 65% damage mitigation
I'm only sure about Mage and Tank, though. Maybe Fighters got only 40% ? Or 50% ? I also dont remember how my Cleric capped, I think it was 50% ? Or maybe 55% ?
Anyway, now if AAs would be built on top of that, I could see that they could add:
Mage: +20% MIT (30% instead of 10% max)
Everyone else: +10% MIT (Tanks jump from 65% to 75%, Fighters from 45% to 55% etc)
Assuming one gains 1 AA per hour in normal adventuring, one could get:
8 AA = +1% MIT (1 day a 8 hours playtime)
16 AA = +2% MIT (2 days)
32 AA = +3% MIT (4 days)
64 AA = +4% MIT (8 days)
128 AA = +5% MIT (16 days)
256 AA = +6% MIT (32 days)
512 AA = +7% MIT (64 days)
1024 AA = +8% MIT (128 days)
2048 AA = +9% MIT (256 days / approx 1 year hardcore playtime)
4096 AA = +10% MIT (512 days / cap / approx 2 year hardcore playtime)
Mages would get double bonus.
Also of course that would be only one stat ... very likely there would be more, like:
Evasion: +10% Block for Tank and Cleric and Shaman, +10% Parry for Fighter, +20% Dodge for Mage
Damage: +60% for tanks, +20% for everyone else
Critical Hit Chance: +10% for tanks, +20% for everyone else
That would total to 8 years of gaming, I would dare to say its quite safe to assume that even the most hardcore gamers wont hit these caps too quickly.
I don't think any cloth casters (unless specifically relevant as a core class design) should be able to gain mitigation/avoidance outside of magical items. They focus on the intellectual studies of the arcane, naturally due to this they are limited physically. This also gives balance to game play.
I mean, if we are going to allow a mage to learn defensive physical abilities, are we going to allow the warrior to learn some arcane abilities and cast some spells? I think those basic roles should be kept to their pro/cons. Last thing I want to see is the fiasco that EQ created by allowing casters to have physical AAs that completely skewed everything. I am not arguing from a position of balance class to class, but role to role and cloth casters should never have any advantage or skill in avoiding or mitigating physical attacks outside of magic.
As for your progression, I really am not sure about it. One thing that bothers me is it looks like one long arduous grind, and for what? You are essentially establishing a powers of 2 progression system for each percent of increase? Look at the risk/reward. Your progression is exponentially driven risk (ie massive time effort), with little reward?
What is likely to happen is that most would put in about 16-32 days effort to it and then forget the rest as the percent difference of that nature will only be viable under a long term parse. That is, whatever can be done with 10% mitigation can also be done with 5-6% mitigation when we consider damage taken, healing chains, etc... so it would be wasted time to even chase the carrot.
One of the things that differentiated time spend in EQ vs that of many Asian MMOs like Lineage and the like was that the reward for effort was well worth it. A system with extreme effort and diminishing returns is definitely not something EQ was known for. That sort of "grind" was something that turned off most of my fellow EQ players.
Grinds must exist, it is the nature of any real progression system game of worth, but it has to be hidden behind "meaningful" effort and reward or it is just pointless time wasting all too common in the "end game" grinds of mainstream games today.
And besides, 75% instead of 65% MIT would have been a HUGE deal on a tank in Vanguard. Thats the difference between the healers throwing all at you they have to keep you alife, or the healers having OOM problems. Or the difference between the healers having OOM problems and them being able to keep up their mana regeneration rotation to keep both you and their mana up high.
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Brad McQuaid
CCO, Visionary Realms, Inc.
www.pantheonmmo.com
--------------------------------------------------------------
After a while, AA farming got boring, it were always the same AA getting increased ranks, and the larger the AA pool, the smaller the difference. Combat Agility went from being like 10% per rank, to like 0.3% or something.
There should have been more collectible AA tied to raids and flags too. The DoN AA system with different ranks was great, but it was only done for one expansion.
But, if someone "wanted" to something that assinine (i.e. the high elf, dark elf example), they could.
"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
So if you would for example have 10 kinds of stats you could invest in (like the aforementioned mitigation, evasion, damage and critical hit chance) and the max is say 2,000 in each, but you can only spent like 5,000 total, so you have to choose what you want to focus into.
I would also like to point out that I wouldnt want to see farming of AA at all. In my mind, AA is what you get during normal exploration, quests, raiding and other such occupations (crafting ? harvesting ? diplomacy? fishing?), not through dull mass killing of mobs. Its OK if mobs drop AA as well, but I would want killing of mobs to be the slowest way to gain AA, just like gaining XP should be much more efficient with quests.
I actually prefer the idea that, unlike modern talent trees, if you spent the time you could get all the AAs. Unlike the equipment grind at max level, the AAs continued to be useful under any new expansion and level cap. I consider a talent-tree system an entirely different beast. Once you start adding caps or limitations, you really need to include the ability to respec. With AAs, if you make a mistake, it isn't limiting in any way.
Modern talent speccing is used in two ways, which are quite different from AAs: (1) enable Tank or Healer classes to switch to a DPS role instead (both to encourage more people to roll tanks and healers and to enable the rare instance when you have too many), and (2) a way of pretending there are more classes than there really are. "Oh, we have Frost Wizard and Fire Wizards and Arcane Wizards, that's like three different classes! Though you can switch between them by sitting down for 5 seconds." If Pantheon limits the memorized spells, you already get that, memorize Fire for the fights against snow monsters, and Ice for the fights against fire monster. Or memorize spells to be the Arcane or AoE Wizard.
I would assume that raising the maxlevel will also increase the maximum caps of AA.
Meaning if maxlevel raises say from 50 to 60, but you dont spent any more AA on say hitpoints which you had capped at 50 but have hit 60, you will still get as much additional hitpoints from AA as you got with level 50, but it will be less than the maximum you could get if you maxed AA on that again.
Respeccing classes as in WoW is to me exactly as lazy a solution as for example instancing.
Instancing for me breaks the experience of living in a virtual world with hundreds or even thousands of other players which can meet me anywhere in this world.
And respeccing classes for me breaks the experience of chosing a certain role. I definitely dont want to be asked on a Cleric to be DD, or on a Paladin to be group healer, etc. Even less do I want to play a Cleric as a DD, only switching to healer when the group asks me to. Whats the point of that, anyway ? I wouldnt have learned to be a healer beforehand. And even in WoW a "real" DD class would deal more damage.
Sure I dont mind subclasses, but they shouldnt change your class around completely to something different. It was certainly fun to be Death Cleric in Vanguard, but I wasnt a DD class this way, not even remotely. I could fearkite and I had probably more dps than any other cleric, but any actual DD class could still outclass me by far.
And I repeat - Vanguard managed to have plenty of healers and also quite a number of tanks simply by making healers and tanks fun to play. I prefer this a LOT over the WoW scheme.
So I both assume as well as hope that Pantheon will strive to keep all classes in their respective party roles, just like Vanguard. You chose being Crusader - you'll be tank. Exclusively.
Meaning for example a Cleric will never be a tank, and a Paladin (well, Crusader) will never be a healer, no matter how they spent their AA, even if AA might make them better offtanks and better emergency healers, respectively.
I think an AA system can add another layer to the sophistication of Pantheon. However, in Everquest today, people are running instances and getting close to 100 AAs in around 30 minutes. You can imagine that it does not take long until a lot of players have all the AAs.
I would much rather see an AA system that allows you to branch out into different specializations. This way your character can be somewhat more unique. Maybe have the AAs granted based on something other than just killing mobs.
I think ideally you want to have many different systems that offer different kinds of experiences. This way hopefully there is always something you feel like working on and always have something you could be doing to further improve your character.
Here is the thing. If you make the effort equal to obtaining the AA, then why bother with the respec? Just earn the AAs you want. If the point is that it would take too long to work for a line of other AAs, well... the argument then becomes that it should be easier to change focus, which... this invalidates the effort of the person who spent the time planning out what type of focus they wanted. That player who doesn't like the choice then wants to be able to chase the "flavor of the week" AAs because someone found out some benefit of working a certain number of AAs together.
While I disagreed with your long arduous AA design, it wasn't because it had a linear one time acquisition progression that bothered me, it was the effort vs reward due to its extreme diminishing returns for the value it gave in the AA on the latter side of the progression. An AA point should always be of the same value. It is demoralizing to have your money devalue as you get closer to your goal as it is a cheap gimmick, a cheat in the players eyes. It is like changing the conditions of an agreement every time someone is about to meet those conditions.
If the worry is that people will gain all the AAs, then you design AAs to be in sufficient number and acquisition rate to last the expected consummation rate of content. This will give a healthy and worthy carrot for the player to chase, but not gimmick them. They will still have a very long grind, but it will be even and expected, not cheapened with diminishing returns. This will also give great value to those who choose different routes in their character building over others as they are building their character. While all classes could eventually have all the same AAs, due to the acquisition rate, few if any will have them all, and many will have different focuses with the pros/cons of such development decisions.
What this does is eliminate the "flavor of the week" type designs because players won't be able to quickly switch up their AAs if they see someone else find a clever combination of use. It rewards clever design, careful planning and skill in learning ones class. People will still be able to achieve that eventual design, but they will then have to work at the AAs to obtain it. Respecing is a convenience that disregards that consequence in development.
But respecs may be necessary due to other factors, such as the game design changing. That can make a rather specific impact on decisions already made.
- Example (from EQ1): The enchanter class was initially described as a 'master of crafting', and was the only really viable way to become a jeweler. No other class got the Jewelry Mastery AAs. Then, everyone could get the Jewelry Mastery AAs, the exclusivity of the Enchanter-as-jeweler was gone. But Shaman can still work Alchemy, and Gnomes still have their Tinkering skill, and retain exclusive skill-related AAs.
Here, the game changed, making the initial decision to invest in Jewelry Mastery less appealing. Yes, there was a partial refund of the AAs spent, but the exclusivity incentive was gone.How would I have approached a situation where game changes modify the factors that went into the initial decision (changed functionality, better option, changed desirability, etc)? I would have created a Respec ability available from an in-world NPC. This Respec NPC would be available only for a limited time beyond the change, maybe a month. This ability would refund all spent AAs, but have some steep cost (or costs) -- some substantial number of AAs (not refunded in the total AAs returned), loss of a character level, and permanent loss of stats, HP/Mana, or faction. This makes the Respec a serious decision in itself, forcing players to judge their degree of dissatisfaction.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Historically, casters have always had mitigation in the form of shield spells, ironskin, skin like wood, steelskin, prismatic shield, forcefield, ghost form, mist form, skin like stone...etc. AA's could improve the stats of those spells or offer better alternatives. In EQ, casters had no real advantages other than kiting, pets and self heals, all of which can be found in melee classes like the paladin, ranger, shadowknight and beastlord. You can argue burst damage vs damage over time, but they usually equaled out in the end.
Allowing them to respec, now that would be a major slap to the face. For instance, lets say you focused on crafting heavily while I as an enchanter put a bunch of time into the adventure portion aspects of play. Now, because that line AAs is no longer restricted, no longer special to enchanters only, you decide... meh.. I don't want to do that anymore and take all of those points (hundreds of hours of effort) and drop them into the adventure portion AA, basically having your cake and eating it too. That is, you got to experience all the benefits of your initially AA design and exclusivity and then, when it was no longer special, you got to have everything I worked for invalidated with a respec.
Again, it is a cheat on the players who put the time in. Like I said, in no way was the player who spent on crafting put out, they got everything they put into it for the time they had it and even after the change, they still had use with it. That is not a valid reason for such. If someone wants other AAs, go out and earn them, that should be the option or it makes any effort put into them worthless.
Yes, but they were magically established and held to the rules of magic use which was governed by spell points, time limits, buff slot management, being dispelled, etc...
I am talking about the physical abilities to which casters had access to. Combat avoidance, Combat Stability, etc.. which were General types open to all classes. This gave casters avoidance and mitigation (as well as other increases with AAs that gave regen, etc...) on top of their spell uses and without any sort of requirement or restriction mechanism that existed with spell use.
They caused a lot of problems in the designs.
A short story now......I was playing had no AA,i was in some jungle/forest zone when i left the game,i do remember i was able to kill everything as i was leveling there and looting.I come back start loading up on AA's i struggled badly to kill the same stuff i had no AA's and was killing.My take on it was they somehow manipulated the numbers/stats to make AA's almost meaningless aside from a couple abilities but again those would last but a few seconds.
I found also they used timers that were just dumb,like everything was basically 1-2 second timers except perhaps 1-2 that might be longer.Also your buffs or debuffs didn't last long enough to barely complete a few attack abilities.This meant you were basically cycling only a few options even though i had like 5 hotbars full of choice.
In contrast when i played FFXI things just made more sense and the combat structure was just a lot better and it had no AA's.Example my buffs would actually last 30 seconds to several minutes,timers were longer because each ability was very effective.Also longer timers meant more choice selecting abilities/spells as well as you had to think a bit when to use something rather than just spam it over and over cycling through the same 3 abilities/spells.
Bottom line is i would not trade a single thing from FFXI combat design for anything from EQ combat.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
When did you play EQ that you noticed this? Sounds like you played after the game was out for many years and they started dumbing down systems which created many issues as you noticed. In all of the time I played (up to around GoD), never did I see what you claimed. AA's mattered and some of them were significant power increases, especially if you got several lines maxed.
As for timers, the point is that in EQ, those were supposed to be situational timers, not like games today where people spam keys in twitch combat. there were some consistent cycle skills (monks had flying kick, tiger claw, etc...), but many had special uses so you didn't want to just mindlessly spam them (ie you waited to use as an interrupt to a caster casting). If you were a tank who cycled Taunt, you were kicked from the group because you were a horrible tank who didn't understand how Taunt worked and how hate lists worked in EQ.
While EQ abilities were a mix of good and bad, and certainly could use some improvements, the last thing you want to do is have the spamming face rolling combat of games today. Skill use should be situational, meaningful, not an arcade spam fest.
While FFXI had some interesting aspects and they should be open to ideas, keep in mind this is EQ/VG in nature, not FFXI, if you are looking for FFXI, this isn't the right game for you.
As for respec, they could follow the same system as SWG here as well. You can respec to get the points you want back, but you lose all the exp it took to level them if you do. It felt very punitive, but it made you really consider where your points went, and whether it was worth respeccing to change something. If/When people did respec in (early) SWG they could potentially throw out days or weeks worth of level time. I do think respec points are necessary in a system in which you have a limited number of AA/Skill points to spend. Unlike EQ AA's where you could learn all AAs, and if you made a bad choice it only amounted to the time wasted to purchase that AA, a system where your AA/Skill points are limited you could perma-gimp you character if respecs were not an option.
Actually if you are looking for FFXI pre Abyssea, this is the only game for you! And why Im supporting this game. FFXI and EQ had a lot in common, if nothing else in the "feel" of the game. There are plenty of differences, but off hand Id have a hard time thinking of any games similar to FFXI aside from EQ and maybe EQOA. And with FFXI going into maint mode soon, Id say you can expect more FFXI vets looking for something similar to old school XI.
Oh and dont let Wizardy bother you too much, he is a raving loon when it comes to XI. And while I do love FFXI and while I do not like the approach the XIV reboot took, Id like to think Im open to ideas outside of XI.
As to the topic at hand, I dont think choosing AAs would come down to being creative. All you can do is read a description, it might sound good but you have no idea of its actual effectiveness. Ive run into this where you spend into an AA and it ends up not being effective. Not because you planned poorly but because it just wasnt that good. Example: 1 AA says it reduces MP consumed and another says it increases Max MPs. Well either could be good but if they dont tell you by hard numbers or percentage, then you have no idea that the Max MPs is crap compared to the reduced consumption. Of course the simple fix for this is detailed descriptions to ensure your AA plans arent all "accidental". If things like this can be avoided then I have no problem with not being able to respec.
Are you asking for limits on which AAs you can take or only just not allowing respec (like if I take AA skill x I cant take AA skill y ever?)
You pick the general direction, like your characters name, gender, race, subrace, and class, at the very start of the game.
Everything else, like subclass, stats, skills, crafter class, harvesting skill choices etc should be changeable, even if it also should require an appropiate amount of effort.
AA clearly belongs very, very clearly to the second type of descisions. Changing your AAs should never result into an essentially different kind of gameplay. Thus AAs absolutley need to be respeccable.
Why? just earn more and fill them out. There is no reason to allow people to change. It is a cheat that flies in the face of those who planned for a certain progression. You don't like that you didn't plan and put points into a line or focus that didn't work out as you liked? Or... you want to change because you saw someone else worked up a nice result using a certain combination of AAs together. Fine.. earn up more experience and focus on it.
Wanting to be able to go "Opps, I like that better... umm... Do Over!" is pure mainstream garbage design and everything wrong with games today. It is flies in the face of those who paid attention, worked hard to develop a solid plan to achieve a result.
Look, nobody is saying you can't have those other AAs, they are saying... if you picked wrong, too bad, earn some more exp and pick better. What is wrong with that? Earn your AA's, don't expect to gimmick them with silly respec mechanics.