Pulled this from Brenlo's coffee diaries on Everquest.com forums.
"I saw the first pass of the class re-evaluation list. I know that many of you were ready to hire poor Indiana Jones to come out of retirement and hunt it down like some religious artifact. No need. It has been unearthed and after some cleaning and prepping will be on display soon. Yes this is one of the good things I have been teasing you about and no I am not going to reveal more just yet. Scream at me all you want, I am used to it. You can't hurt my feelings *sniff*."
This is starting to scare me.
- Forums
- EverQuest
- General Discussion
- Class Re-envisioning
Class Re-envisioningFollow
Class re-evaluation is being considered by Sony? Now I'm scared too.
why are you scared? just start a new toon 
Still a noob. :-P
Characters on Drinal, Povar, EMarr, Firiona Vie.
Characters on Drinal, Povar, EMarr, Firiona Vie.
I'm Afraid!
"If you ask me, we could do with a little less motivation. The people who are causing all the trouble seem highly motivated to me. Serial killers, stock swindlers, drug dealers, Christian Republicans"
George Carlin.
George Carlin.
They occasionally go through periods of re-tuning and re-balancing class structures, but when they do it's to arbitrarily restrict players to following the Sony Vision and mostly ignore any useful, constructive advice or criticism that the players have. Usually, after a tuning or re-balance of this nature, there's cries from several class communities saying "Huh? WTF they do that for?"
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
I just can't seem to get my arms around this. Not sure how Sony is approaching this, but I can't see them tweaking the individual classes much without a whole bus load of class wars.
I can certainly understand addressing the "top 10 issues" list for each class (some have been addressed already), but a RE-envisioning of class roles kinda boggles me.
I can certainly understand addressing the "top 10 issues" list for each class (some have been addressed already), but a RE-envisioning of class roles kinda boggles me.
Sounds like another nerf to me
Yup, more flailing around blindly with the nerf bat. Hooray! 
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
The top ten issues lists were born from the announcement that they were going to "reevaluate" class roles. They wanted to make it so that certain classes didn't get continually left out and so that certain classes weren't absolutely needed all of the time. Prime examples are it used to be if you were a ranger 45+, getting a group involved sexual favors and sacrificing your 1st born, but a 45 cleric could get a group in KC (where it was understood you HAD to be 50+) without blinking an eye. Maybe not a fair comparison since they're different roles, but the point still stands.
They've continually made changes to encourage letting "the less desireables" into your group. Things like an increased grouping bonus based on how many are in your group, not just that there are more then 3. Giving and/or taking away abilities and spells to/from certain classes to allow the competing classes of the same role a chance to get in groups. There have been other small changes too, but those are the big ones. I don't know if it was all an intentional part of the "reevaluation", but it largely had the same effect. You don't HAVE to have a chanter to hunt in dungeons anymore, and you don't HAVE to have a cleric to have any hope of keeping your MT alive (in most day to day content at least).
I think this big reevaluation that they're finally getting around to doing is really going to be more inline with the "class roles" that they promised us long ago. They're going to say "We want bards to be pullers" and "We want rogues to be the sustained DPS kings" etc. It probably won't be much more then that. Of course, I could be wrong...
They've continually made changes to encourage letting "the less desireables" into your group. Things like an increased grouping bonus based on how many are in your group, not just that there are more then 3. Giving and/or taking away abilities and spells to/from certain classes to allow the competing classes of the same role a chance to get in groups. There have been other small changes too, but those are the big ones. I don't know if it was all an intentional part of the "reevaluation", but it largely had the same effect. You don't HAVE to have a chanter to hunt in dungeons anymore, and you don't HAVE to have a cleric to have any hope of keeping your MT alive (in most day to day content at least).
I think this big reevaluation that they're finally getting around to doing is really going to be more inline with the "class roles" that they promised us long ago. They're going to say "We want bards to be pullers" and "We want rogues to be the sustained DPS kings" etc. It probably won't be much more then that. Of course, I could be wrong...
Well, they certainly have re-envisioned the Necro (Man is my Bud Ticked) with DoN!
He always complained that his Necro never had a group or any tells unless someone needed him to Summon a corpse....
He also said it was a way to make some cash, but the talismans in the Guild Lobby cost less than the coffins necro's need.
He wants SOE to refund all necros the cost of the summoning spells seeing they are practically useless now....lol
I feel for him...what ya gonna do?
He always complained that his Necro never had a group or any tells unless someone needed him to Summon a corpse....
He also said it was a way to make some cash, but the talismans in the Guild Lobby cost less than the coffins necro's need.
He wants SOE to refund all necros the cost of the summoning spells seeing they are practically useless now....lol
I feel for him...what ya gonna do?
If you want more dps classes to get more groups, which I think is what they are talking about fixing, then increase the group size to 8 and keep the experience split the same as it is now for 5 and 6 in a group (1/5 + grouping bonus).
With a current higher level group needing a tank, healer and slower mandatory for success, that leaves 3 more spots left for DPS. Depending on the particular camps requirements which vary: you may need more roles filled as well. If your tank is not an SK and your healer not a druid then you might need a puller and/or a snaring role which may require using up 1-2 of those dps spots. If your slower is not an enchanter you might need to use one of those dps spots for add control as well (if not filled by one of the other spots). In theory at a tough camp, a group could use all 6 spots for specialized roles and pure DPS classes would be shut out.
I have not found it unusual to be in a group of 6 in a tough higher level zone with an essential role(s) filled from outside the group by a 2 boxing players 2nd toon, or even once a non 2 boxing player just helping out his guildies and participating in loot drops (the latter was monk puller/extra dps stayed out of grp, and did not want to raid and reduce everyones exp, just wanted in on rolls at 6 spawn in WoS).
The point being that players have adapted to the group size limit by using these tactics, why not increase the group size and solve all these problems. If SOE thinks we can just form a raid to solve this then they do not understand that player have noticed a lot less experience per kill when raiding versus a group, and would not use a raid becasue of this.
I do not think that when SOE designed a 6 person group that they envisioned the number of specialized roles that would eventually evolve and become needed for success at higher level zone camps. The solution is to increase group max size and therefore demand for pure dps to get groups at that level. Wizards etc would be very happy.
With a current higher level group needing a tank, healer and slower mandatory for success, that leaves 3 more spots left for DPS. Depending on the particular camps requirements which vary: you may need more roles filled as well. If your tank is not an SK and your healer not a druid then you might need a puller and/or a snaring role which may require using up 1-2 of those dps spots. If your slower is not an enchanter you might need to use one of those dps spots for add control as well (if not filled by one of the other spots). In theory at a tough camp, a group could use all 6 spots for specialized roles and pure DPS classes would be shut out.
I have not found it unusual to be in a group of 6 in a tough higher level zone with an essential role(s) filled from outside the group by a 2 boxing players 2nd toon, or even once a non 2 boxing player just helping out his guildies and participating in loot drops (the latter was monk puller/extra dps stayed out of grp, and did not want to raid and reduce everyones exp, just wanted in on rolls at 6 spawn in WoS).
The point being that players have adapted to the group size limit by using these tactics, why not increase the group size and solve all these problems. If SOE thinks we can just form a raid to solve this then they do not understand that player have noticed a lot less experience per kill when raiding versus a group, and would not use a raid becasue of this.
I do not think that when SOE designed a 6 person group that they envisioned the number of specialized roles that would eventually evolve and become needed for success at higher level zone camps. The solution is to increase group max size and therefore demand for pure dps to get groups at that level. Wizards etc would be very happy.
©
"Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." -Henry Louis Mencken
"Ha! I laugh at danger and drop ice cubes down the vest of fear." - Blackadder
"Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." -Henry Louis Mencken
"Ha! I laugh at danger and drop ice cubes down the vest of fear." - Blackadder
Fhrugby, I like the idea of bigger groups a lot (if experience didn't drop radically), maybe even a bigger full group bonus.
The idea of re-evaluation makes me shudder, here a nerf, there a nerf, everywhere a nerf.
The idea of re-evaluation makes me shudder, here a nerf, there a nerf, everywhere a nerf.
I'm not as think as you drunk I am.
The Latest OnTheSubjectOf ~ 2 New jokes (whenever the webmaster feels like updating them) for your laughing convenience. Other kool stuff.
The Latest OnTheSubjectOf ~ 2 New jokes (whenever the webmaster feels like updating them) for your laughing convenience. Other kool stuff.
Probably the only classes that should be worried about nerfs are clerics and bards, I think. Maybe rogues and wizards to a lesser degree.
I've been thinking of switching to a bard for a while, but kind of holding off on that until I see what comes of this.
I've been thinking of switching to a bard for a while, but kind of holding off on that until I see what comes of this.
Read my lips: they nerf classes and they lose more players to WoW. Class nerfs are the worst kind of nerfs possible. Monk mitigation nerf was the biggest slap in the face to people who play monks. Bard AOE nerf also comes to mind. I've said it before on this board: Don't give us something cool, take it away, break it and then give it back. If you're going to do that, don't give it to us in the first place. You just make people mad that way.
They may do it, but it would be one of the saddest moves in the history of gaming imo.
Another approach to class balancing is to "beef up" the classes that are lagging rather than "nerf" the ones that aren't. I hope they go this route, but their track record doesn't suggest this will happen. Some suggestions that come to mind? Beef up the pally (post level 50). Give the necro some more qualities that groups would want. Give the Wizzie more than nuking and porting. Improve Shammy healing (though their slow will usually get them groups). Improve Ranger/Monk mitigation. All of these things and many more can be done without taking away the uniqueness of each class. I'm hoping they go this route.
Personally I would like to see Rangers and Druids get a pet. Some kind of woodland creature. No no, I meant a USEFUL pet for you druids out there. Don't know how this would help a group, (maybe as an offtank and added DPS) but I'd like to see it anyways.
One good sign is that Brenlo seems to think we are going to like the changes.. I think that is good no?
Edit:
Heheh I wrote this on another thread and decided I would tack it on the bottom of this post for your amusement. Enjoy!
Upcoming changes as per the class re-envisioning plan:
Cleric: Clerics will now only be able to heal you if you have less than 5% health. We discovered that some players were using heals to chain heal during raids.
Ranger: Now instead of 53 AA's to become a master archer you will need 453 AA's. Anyone who previously had AM3 will NOT be grandfathered in.
Warrior: Warriors will now be able to mitigate at the same level as rangers.
Pally: nothing, this class can't compete with warriors after level 50 so we think it is working just fine.
SK/Druid: the SK and druid pet is now even more useless.
Wizard: Wizard nuke spells now cost twice as much mana, increase aggro three times, and take twice as long to cast.
Mages: see above Wizard and all pets after level 59 have been removed from the game. We discovered that players were using them to increase DPS.
Necro: Necro pets may no longer taunt. Root type spells have been removed from the necro spell line.
Monk/Bard: we think we have effectively "fixed these classes" but we reserve the right to incorporate new abilities with the next expansion then remove them later on.
Rogue: Backstab is now a clickable disc usable once per 60 mins. Again, we felt that certain players were exploiting this ability to increase group DPS.
Shaman: Slow will no longer affect mobs, it can still be used to slow the player if desired.
Enchanter: Dire charm has been removed from the game. All mesmerization type spells now have a 50% chance to affect the caster. Memblur type spells have been removed from the game.
Beastlords: Beastlord pet will now function at the same level as a druid pet. Beast slow and haste spells have been removed from the game. The item Bone-studded loop is no longer usable by the Beastlord Class.
Edited, Thu Mar 10 17:52:50 2005 by Sargethetachi
Edited, Thu Mar 10 17:56:12 2005 by Sargethetachi
They may do it, but it would be one of the saddest moves in the history of gaming imo.
Another approach to class balancing is to "beef up" the classes that are lagging rather than "nerf" the ones that aren't. I hope they go this route, but their track record doesn't suggest this will happen. Some suggestions that come to mind? Beef up the pally (post level 50). Give the necro some more qualities that groups would want. Give the Wizzie more than nuking and porting. Improve Shammy healing (though their slow will usually get them groups). Improve Ranger/Monk mitigation. All of these things and many more can be done without taking away the uniqueness of each class. I'm hoping they go this route.
Personally I would like to see Rangers and Druids get a pet. Some kind of woodland creature. No no, I meant a USEFUL pet for you druids out there. Don't know how this would help a group, (maybe as an offtank and added DPS) but I'd like to see it anyways.
One good sign is that Brenlo seems to think we are going to like the changes.. I think that is good no?
Edit:
Heheh I wrote this on another thread and decided I would tack it on the bottom of this post for your amusement. Enjoy!
Upcoming changes as per the class re-envisioning plan:
Cleric: Clerics will now only be able to heal you if you have less than 5% health. We discovered that some players were using heals to chain heal during raids.
Ranger: Now instead of 53 AA's to become a master archer you will need 453 AA's. Anyone who previously had AM3 will NOT be grandfathered in.
Warrior: Warriors will now be able to mitigate at the same level as rangers.
Pally: nothing, this class can't compete with warriors after level 50 so we think it is working just fine.
SK/Druid: the SK and druid pet is now even more useless.
Wizard: Wizard nuke spells now cost twice as much mana, increase aggro three times, and take twice as long to cast.
Mages: see above Wizard and all pets after level 59 have been removed from the game. We discovered that players were using them to increase DPS.
Necro: Necro pets may no longer taunt. Root type spells have been removed from the necro spell line.
Monk/Bard: we think we have effectively "fixed these classes" but we reserve the right to incorporate new abilities with the next expansion then remove them later on.
Rogue: Backstab is now a clickable disc usable once per 60 mins. Again, we felt that certain players were exploiting this ability to increase group DPS.
Shaman: Slow will no longer affect mobs, it can still be used to slow the player if desired.
Enchanter: Dire charm has been removed from the game. All mesmerization type spells now have a 50% chance to affect the caster. Memblur type spells have been removed from the game.
Beastlords: Beastlord pet will now function at the same level as a druid pet. Beast slow and haste spells have been removed from the game. The item Bone-studded loop is no longer usable by the Beastlord Class.
Edited, Thu Mar 10 17:52:50 2005 by Sargethetachi
Edited, Thu Mar 10 17:56:12 2005 by Sargethetachi
Sargethetachi wrote:
Give the necro some more qualities that groups would want.
Dunno, after my experience witha Necro a couple nights ago, there's always room for them if I'm in a group.
Damn that class rocks.
yes they can make THE difference, but they often get overlooked when putting groups together.
Sargethetachi wrote:
Read my lips: they nerf classes and they lose more players to WoW. Class nerfs are the worst kind of nerfs possible. Monk mitigation nerf was the biggest slap in the face to people who play monks. Bard AOE nerf also comes to mind. I've said it before on this board: Don't give us something cool, take it away, break it and then give it back. If you're going to do that, don't give it to us in the first place. You just make people mad that way.
Yeah. But it doesn't always happen that way IMO. Characters often become unitentionally more powerful (or weaker) as game content gets added to the game. Monk avoidance was not a problem until they added in newer high AC, low weight gear to the game. That combined with AC softcaps meant that in many exp group situations, monks could now tank better then any class in the game, which I don't think anyone can argue was intended or desired. The monk class's inherently higher avoidance was intended to offset the fact that they could only wear low AC gear (mitigation), with the intended result to have a character that could tank maybe as well as a ranger. Maybe. The solution was to generate a penalty for wearing high mitigation armor (high AC values) to bring that back to what it had always been.
The bard nerfs were also mostly due to content changes. SOE has experiemented with different "kinds" of mobs in different expansions. What happened is that starting in luclin (but not really hitting stride until PoP), SoE switched from mobs that had relatively even amounts of HP/AC/DPS to mobs that had lowish HP and/or AC, and very high DPS. With some mobs this was really dramatic. Huge DPS, but relatively low HPs. This made charming much more powerful then it had been before since you got a pet that dished out more damage. Swarm kiting became a hugely useful tactic simply because the mobs could kill eachother off much faster then they could before, and a well played bard could get exp off them all. AOE tactics, and kite tactics became more relatively valuable as well.
That's actually something that many players don't seem to get. Back in Kunark/Velious era, a "solo class" could solo better then a non-solo class, but not a lot better. Due to the huge discrepancy between HPs and DPS, any class that can kill without getting hit in the process has a *huge* advantage over one that can't. My paladin literally can't defeat mobs that druids and wizards can trivially quad kite simply due to the extremely high DPS rates that mobs have. They have still never really adjusted for that properly. In GoD and OoW, they shifted from raw dps to proc damage effects. Whoopie! You're still taking pretty fast damage as a tank, but for any class that doesn't have to sit there and get hit, the mobs are no tougher to kill then a Kunark era mob of the exact same level. Um... They've also increased the exp bonus for those newer mobs (to offset the fact that they do more damage I'm sure!), which is useless to melee classes who can't solo them, but basically just a huge bonus for those who can.
Note, that I've not pointed out a single change to a class. I'm just showing how by changing the nature of the mobs in a given expansion, you can drastically change the relative power of the classes in the game.
Quote:
They may do it, but it would be one of the saddest moves in the history of gaming imo.
Totally disagree. A game that does not make an effort to keep the classes somewhat balanced will not last long. Sure. In the short term, you'll get a bunch of shortsighted people who are just pissed because their overpowered class got trimmed back to be equivalent in power to every other class, but in the long run you retain more players. It's a good thing, as long as the changes aren't truely arbitrary (as opposed to those who are directly affected claiming they are arbitrary).
Quote:
Another approach to class balancing is to "beef up" the classes that are lagging rather than "nerf" the ones that aren't. I hope they go this route, but their track record doesn't suggest this will happen. Some suggestions that come to mind? Beef up the pally (post level 50). Give the necro some more qualities that groups would want. Give the Wizzie more than nuking and porting. Improve Shammy healing (though their slow will usually get them groups). Improve Ranger/Monk mitigation. All of these things and many more can be done without taking away the uniqueness of each class. I'm hoping they go this route.
No. That's a bad method. While you can (and should) do occasional beef-ups of classes, your primary method of class balance should be reducing overpowered characters.
Picture two bowls of icecream. Your job is to put the same amount in each bowl. Inevitably, you scoop out a bit too much for one of the bowls. The "smart" way to balance them is to take some from one bowl and put it in another. That keeps the overall amount of icecream the same, but makes both bowls even. If you just add icecream, then anytime you make a mistake, you much keep adding more to correct it. Pretty soon, you'll have some seriously large bowls of icecream going, and *still* not evened them. Now imagine that instead of two bowls, there are 15 that need to be balanced. Additionally, instead of just icecream, you've got banannas in there and chocolate, and sprinkles, and whipped cream. Just adding more to each one will *never* result in even amounts. It's too complex with too many things to balance. Inevitably, something will be unbalanced somewhere, and we'll have to keep adding more to all the bowls to try to balance things out.
Even some of your suggestions don't make any sense. If you add tanking ability to monks and rangers, how exactly does that not reduce the uniqueness of the warrior class? Isn't his *only* contribution to a group his ability to tank? While I wouldn't mind having pally's beefed up, I would vastly prefer they "fix" paladins by changing/adding game content that is pally/melee friendly. How about putting in mobs that have *high* HPs, moderate AC and *low* dps? What a freaking concept! Mobs that wouldn't be very useful for charming, and would be difficult and time consuming to kite, but would actually be killable by melee classes! It's a miracle! We've just rebalanced soloing abilities for several classes, all without changing a single class in the game!
Add in a few undead mobs that match those criteria, and I'd be happy as hell. It would mean that loggin in on a slow night isn't a total waste. Right now, I *can* solo, but literally will spend like an hour getting an amount of exp that I can get in about 2 kills in a group in WoS. Tell me how that makes any sense at all...
Quote:
Personally I would like to see Rangers and Druids get a pet. Some kind of woodland creature. No no, I meant a USEFUL pet for you druids out there. Don't know how this would help a group, (maybe as an offtank and added DPS) but I'd like to see it anyways.
Ok. But what is that correcting? What imbalance exists in the game that must be filled by giving rangers a pet (and druid a better pet)? You say yourself that you don't know how this will help a group, but you want it anyway. Um... All it'll do is make beastlords redundant. Additionally, you've arbitrarily increased the dps of both classes for no apparent reason (ranger's aren't already one of the best melee dps, and they need more?). Druids will just be able to kill stuff that much faster (did they have a problem before?). Honestly, that addition would be huge for ranger soloing (especially fear kiting animals since that's just extra dps). It would mostly add to druids group damage (since their solo tactics don't really take advantage of a pet). Druids already do a pretty nice mix of dps and healing (and buffing, snaring, CC, etc). Do they really need *more*?
Class balance is not an easy issue. It's a lot easier to critisize how someone else does it then come up with realistically viable ideas yourself.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
"But what is that correcting? What imbalance exists in the game that must be filled by giving rangers a pet"
Don't Rangers get some kinda, errrr, pet thingy? A Mistcaller or something like that?
Don't Rangers get some kinda, errrr, pet thingy? A Mistcaller or something like that?
With the Scimitar of Mistwalker, a Pet will process. Walk with you, zone with you.
In battle, it provides one hit of about 150, then takes an automatic 10,000 points of damage, killing it. I believe initially it did not take the 10,000 points of damage 'back in the day' so to say.
The best thing about the Scimitar was simply having the pet tag along. A one hit pet is rather useless, but there have been occasions to use it to run down a mob, or pull or seperate a group of mobs. Sold mine a couple months ago.
I understand the issues being discussed here of balance. And I do not care.
I do not care - give my Ranger a Pet, and I will not ever leave this game! Never, ever, really. Just a pet - for my little ranger. Even a rat, though I would prefer a rabid wombat.
Journey far and fare well (though it will be better with a pet!)
In battle, it provides one hit of about 150, then takes an automatic 10,000 points of damage, killing it. I believe initially it did not take the 10,000 points of damage 'back in the day' so to say.
The best thing about the Scimitar was simply having the pet tag along. A one hit pet is rather useless, but there have been occasions to use it to run down a mob, or pull or seperate a group of mobs. Sold mine a couple months ago.
I understand the issues being discussed here of balance. And I do not care.
I do not care - give my Ranger a Pet, and I will not ever leave this game! Never, ever, really. Just a pet - for my little ranger. Even a rat, though I would prefer a rabid wombat.
Journey far and fare well (though it will be better with a pet!)
Journey far and fare well!
Rangers do not need a pet. I think rangers need their spell book revamped, especially where their DOT's and Nukes are concerned. Give me a 1 sec cast 500 hp DD, with a 10-15 sec refresh, and I would be happy. My ranger runs around with 100% mana almost all of the time, I wish I had a use for it.
Casting level 30 druid spells at level 60 just doesn't cut it, the spells don't scale with the content.
Snare does scale with content as do Pally Stuns, in fact I would argue a stun increases in power along with the content. If a pally can keep a mob stunned on a pull, until the slow lands, this mitigates huge amounts of damage, and is one of the reasons that Pallies leave SKs in the dust as far as tanking is concerned. Lifetaps have the same problem as the rangers DD's, they don't scale witht the content. A 300 hp LT doesn't mean anything if the mob is hiting you for 500 a swing, quadding for 2k. A stun that avoids 2 rounds of combat, has the potential to mitigate 4k worth of damage, this is much more impressive than the 300 hp LT IMO. If I am missing something, I am sure you will all tell me.
Casting level 30 druid spells at level 60 just doesn't cut it, the spells don't scale with the content.
Snare does scale with content as do Pally Stuns, in fact I would argue a stun increases in power along with the content. If a pally can keep a mob stunned on a pull, until the slow lands, this mitigates huge amounts of damage, and is one of the reasons that Pallies leave SKs in the dust as far as tanking is concerned. Lifetaps have the same problem as the rangers DD's, they don't scale witht the content. A 300 hp LT doesn't mean anything if the mob is hiting you for 500 a swing, quadding for 2k. A stun that avoids 2 rounds of combat, has the potential to mitigate 4k worth of damage, this is much more impressive than the 300 hp LT IMO. If I am missing something, I am sure you will all tell me.
Sarcasm, the lowest form of wit, is my best weapon.
Reinmon, 58 Ranger
Slaher, 58 Shaman
Aude Sapere
Povar Server
Reinmon, 58 Ranger
Slaher, 58 Shaman
Aude Sapere
Povar Server
Quote:
Snare does scale with content as do Pally Stuns, in fact I would argue a stun increases in power along with the content. If a pally can keep a mob stunned on a pull, until the slow lands, this mitigates huge amounts of damage, and is one of the reasons that Pallies leave SKs in the dust as far as tanking is concerned.
only true until you get to unstunnable mobs.
sks do have a great series of taps, though.
Well I think the New Sony , if you will, is a little more market oriented. So I do not suspect radical changes.
As far as my Ranger is concerned, I am happy with what he has.
My only complaint sbout Rangers would be for a ~Melee Class~ The weapons that are avalible suck, compared to other Melee classes,After 60 non Flagged.
But then Rangers get to switch to EP Bows (Only class i know that can Buy a EP weapon and not be EP Flaged) . And High end Melee weapons are on par again once you get flagged. So not really much of a complaint.
I would love a Pet though, more as entertainment than anything, would take the Druid teddybear. But a "Ranger Duck" able to die faster than you can blink. =) It be funny for a week at least.
As far as my Ranger is concerned, I am happy with what he has.
My only complaint sbout Rangers would be for a ~Melee Class~ The weapons that are avalible suck, compared to other Melee classes,After 60 non Flagged.
But then Rangers get to switch to EP Bows (Only class i know that can Buy a EP weapon and not be EP Flaged) . And High end Melee weapons are on par again once you get flagged. So not really much of a complaint.
I would love a Pet though, more as entertainment than anything, would take the Druid teddybear. But a "Ranger Duck" able to die faster than you can blink. =) It be funny for a week at least.
EQ1 WoodElf Ranger Maelin Starpyre
Kullayen
Kullayen
9 posts
I agree will Kullayen give rangers better weapons..but on making rangers have the same level nuke/dots as a druid which was said up above ... then why would you need a druid after that? Cause now you have a rangers beating and dotting/nuking the heck out of stuff.
It will be intresting to see what happens with this.
Zaphian- 62 Druid
Yunevha- 43 Beastlord
It will be intresting to see what happens with this.
Zaphian- 62 Druid
Yunevha- 43 Beastlord
Quote:
My only complaint sbout Rangers would be for a ~Melee Class~ The weapons that are avalible suck, compared to other Melee classes,After 60 non Flagged.
not really. SBOS is dirt cheap and still not a bad weapon. in the slightly higher end, there are a lot of attuneable weapons that are useable by rangers. most of the weapons the 'other' melee classes use are ranger useable.
SBOS ?? Talk slow to me What is that?
Also I have looked there are some Nice OoW weapons that are upgrades.
Edge of Envelopment but tend to stick with dual wield due to Swifty's ATK and Haste
Right now I use a 1.25 Ratio in Main and Sec is Swifty.
Best I think I have seen (droppable) is Shadowbash with a 1.05 Ratio but was just for DoN intro that it droped.
Really not complaining the rest to the Qoute would say where i think they do drop off Bows become DPS king for Ranger. The [~Melee Class] thing in my comment is more of my dislike that we are called Melee by Sony when I would rather be Bow. And with the likley hood that I will not do Progression through PoP and such, I will be Bow!! (So no Complaint) Well 16.5 AA's
till EQ/AM3 then it will be king.
Now if I has high end I would complain about lack of Bow and Arrow increase, but I am not, and at High End Ranger Melee Weapons are no Joke.
But I am hoping to Get
Jagged Shard of Frozen Flame
LORE ITEM MAGIC ITEM NO DROP
Weight: 2.0 Size: MEDIUM
Slot: PRIMARY SECONDARY
Damage: 17 Delay: 20
Ratio: 1.176 Amazing
Damage Bonus: 13 (lvl 65)
Comparative Efficiency: 117
Offhand Efficiency: 52
Drops off Jiva
Also I have looked there are some Nice OoW weapons that are upgrades.
Edge of Envelopment but tend to stick with dual wield due to Swifty's ATK and Haste
Right now I use a 1.25 Ratio in Main and Sec is Swifty.
Best I think I have seen (droppable) is Shadowbash with a 1.05 Ratio but was just for DoN intro that it droped.
Really not complaining the rest to the Qoute would say where i think they do drop off Bows become DPS king for Ranger. The [~Melee Class] thing in my comment is more of my dislike that we are called Melee by Sony when I would rather be Bow. And with the likley hood that I will not do Progression through PoP and such, I will be Bow!! (So no Complaint) Well 16.5 AA's
till EQ/AM3 then it will be king.
Now if I has high end I would complain about lack of Bow and Arrow increase, but I am not, and at High End Ranger Melee Weapons are no Joke.
But I am hoping to Get
Jagged Shard of Frozen Flame
LORE ITEM MAGIC ITEM NO DROP
Weight: 2.0 Size: MEDIUM
Slot: PRIMARY SECONDARY
Damage: 17 Delay: 20
Ratio: 1.176 Amazing
Damage Bonus: 13 (lvl 65)
Comparative Efficiency: 117
Offhand Efficiency: 52
Drops off Jiva
EQ1 WoodElf Ranger Maelin Starpyre
Kullayen
Kullayen
Just to add a story of why people do want chages.
An example was posted on this topic in a rangers forum.
Just thought I would throw out why someone thinks classes need to be looked at.
Now there was a discussion that went basically like this
~
A BL and a RNG both tanking same mobs over and over switching back. 70 RNG 400 AA's Buffed to 9k BL lvl65 7AAs buffed under 6K.
RNG took more DMG than BL everytime. Prob is chain class should tank better than a leather class. But take that to sony and the fear is instead off increasing RNG mitigation or Avoidance they may just nurf Leather class and call it balanced. lol
But the end result is with higher hitting Mobs the Mitigation of all Chain class has made them the worst tanks in the game even behind Leather Class.
Reason
**** Numbers are made up to illustrate what is happening***
Mob hits for 500 lets say.
Chain mitigates it down to 450 while Leather takes 500
Chain aviods 2 hits per 10 and Leather 3
Chain then takes 3600 DMG
Leather Then takes 3500 DMG
This will increase as mobs hit harder.
~
No with this I understand why people want to change. No one can say that the game was ever intended to have a leather class out tank a chain.
(not also trying to say a chain class should tank)
But lends to the idea that chain classes are smiling and saying Yea Sony is gonna beef us up. But my fear would be that Sony make Leather class avoid less or take more DMG.
Just hope people are carefull what they ask for.
For me I enjoy my class, if they do something to make my Toon better Yea!!! But if they do nothing Yea!!!!! If they nerf something on RNG's (What I have no idea lol) Boo!!!! And I think that is how everyone feels.
I think Sony is smart enough to know that rounds of Nerfs will not help them make gamers happy. And unhappy gamers leave and they are out $$$.
So cross your fingers and hope.
An example was posted on this topic in a rangers forum.
Just thought I would throw out why someone thinks classes need to be looked at.
Now there was a discussion that went basically like this
~
A BL and a RNG both tanking same mobs over and over switching back. 70 RNG 400 AA's Buffed to 9k BL lvl65 7AAs buffed under 6K.
RNG took more DMG than BL everytime. Prob is chain class should tank better than a leather class. But take that to sony and the fear is instead off increasing RNG mitigation or Avoidance they may just nurf Leather class and call it balanced. lol
But the end result is with higher hitting Mobs the Mitigation of all Chain class has made them the worst tanks in the game even behind Leather Class.
Reason
**** Numbers are made up to illustrate what is happening***
Mob hits for 500 lets say.
Chain mitigates it down to 450 while Leather takes 500
Chain aviods 2 hits per 10 and Leather 3
Chain then takes 3600 DMG
Leather Then takes 3500 DMG
This will increase as mobs hit harder.
~
No with this I understand why people want to change. No one can say that the game was ever intended to have a leather class out tank a chain.
(not also trying to say a chain class should tank)
But lends to the idea that chain classes are smiling and saying Yea Sony is gonna beef us up. But my fear would be that Sony make Leather class avoid less or take more DMG.
Just hope people are carefull what they ask for.
For me I enjoy my class, if they do something to make my Toon better Yea!!! But if they do nothing Yea!!!!! If they nerf something on RNG's (What I have no idea lol) Boo!!!! And I think that is how everyone feels.
I think Sony is smart enough to know that rounds of Nerfs will not help them make gamers happy. And unhappy gamers leave and they are out $$$.
So cross your fingers and hope.
EQ1 WoodElf Ranger Maelin Starpyre
Kullayen
Kullayen
Recent Visitors: 0
All times are in CDT
- Forums
- EverQuest
- General Discussion
- Class Re-envisioning
© 2018 ZAM Network LLC