Monks should not be tanks [Archive] - EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire

Greyto

10-28-2005, 10:35 AM

<P></P><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <P>Yeah, luckily for you Vanguard currently only has 4 tank classes, which can all tank equally well. LoL. They are using the same system EQ2 is. Of course I'm sure you don't want to hear that.</P> <P>Monks are uber in Vanguard anyway.</P> <P> </P> <P></P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>7.3 How does choosing classes work?</P> <P>"First, it's important to point out that <I>Vanguard</I> is a 'multi-sphere' game, where at any given time your character actually has three classes: adventuring, crafting, and diplomacy. Also our primary goal isn’t to create a perfect, balanced class system."</P> <P>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</P> <P>Thought you read up on this stuff Giage?</P> <P>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</P> <P>7.4.1 How will you deal with the hybrid vs. specialist issues?</P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P>By defining core roles that each class needs to fit into, so we don't run into the hybrid/specialist problems we've seen in other games. Every class has a primary role it needs to fill and they can fill it very well.</P> <P> </P> <P>I know I know somewhere in a galaxy far far away Moorgard wrote that you would be able to Tank as well as a guardian. The point is that the literature we had to go on at the time we made our classes said something entirely different. Now almost a year later Steve has decided to "fix" the game.</P> <P>Fine for you the game is fixed, for me it is not.</P> <P>We will never agree on why you feel the game is working and I feel it is not. You won I lost... Game over.</P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P>

Nemi

10-28-2005, 11:06 AM

<P></P> <P><BR></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Greytoon wrote:<BR> <P></P><BR> <P>7.4.1 How will you deal with the hybrid vs. specialist issues?</P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P>By defining core roles that each class needs to fit into, so we don't run into the hybrid/specialist problems we've seen in other games. <FONT color=#ff0000><EM>Every class has a primary role it needs to fill and they can fill it very well.</EM></FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Compare that to:</FONT></P> <P><B><FONT color=#ffff99 size=3>Won’t balancing become a real issue with that many classes?</FONT></B></P> <P><FONT color=#ffffff size=3>Class balance is always a complicated issue, but the archetype system allows us to manage it much more effectively.<SPAN> </SPAN>Each class and subclass is balanced at the archetype level.<SPAN> <EM> </EM></SPAN><EM><FONT color=#ff0000>Every archetype has a main role in a group situation, and each member of a given archetype will be able to fill that role equally well</FONT></EM>.<SPAN> </SPAN>If you're a fighter, you can tank for a group; if you're a priest, you can heal for a group; and so on. This is the beauty of an archetype system. </FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR><FONT color=#ffff00>Seems strikingly familiar to me. In essence Everquest2 has 4 classes it needs to balance : Fighter, Mage, Scout and Priest. I think Vanguard will have a much harder time trying for balance when they consider they have 2 other aspects of the class to balance, Diplomacy and Tradeskill.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>What you will end up with is EQ1: There will be set classes that excel at the game, the rest will be subpar and only chosen by those people that actually care about lore and flavour.</FONT></P>

Qilin

10-28-2005, 01:19 PM

<DIV> <P>Wow, even Gaige likes Vanguard monks, and they are not tanks. My point exactly.</P> <P> </P> <DIV>Say what you will, I am convinced that our problems are being driven by taking a damange dealer and trying to make them tanks at the same time. </DIV></DIV>

Sasaki Koji

10-28-2005, 02:04 PM

<DIV>Bruce Lee can kick Sir Lancelots Butt!</DIV>

Shakir10

10-28-2005, 04:08 PM

<DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <P>Yeah, luckily for you Vanguard currently only has 4 tank classes, which can all tank equally well. LoL. They are using the same system EQ2 is. Of course I'm sure you don't want to hear that.</P> <P>Monks are uber in Vanguard anyway.</P> <P> </P> <P></P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Gaige, you should go read up on it a bit more. They want all classes to have a specific role. Wariors will be the best raid tanks in that game. Yes all the others can do it, but wariors will be best. But you can stay here where leather men rule. </DIV>

Tro

10-28-2005, 04:23 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Shakir1065 wrote:<BR> <DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <P>Yeah, luckily for you Vanguard currently only has 4 tank classes, which can all tank equally well. LoL. They are using the same system EQ2 is. Of course I'm sure you don't want to hear that.</P> <P>Monks are uber in Vanguard anyway.</P> <P> </P> <P></P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Gaige, you should go read up on it a bit more. They want all classes to have a specific role. Wariors will be the best raid tanks in that game. Yes all the others can do it, but wariors will be best. But you can stay here where leather men rule. </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I agree.. I read that as there will be no Archtype system in Vanguard. I honestly believe that is the way to go.. Warriors are the preferred Raid tank. You wanna Tank raid mobs.. roll a Warrior, You wanna Heal Roll a Priest etc.. </P> <P>Hopefully Folks will not go to VG when it is released and "Want" to be a raid tank but instead roll a Monk then 3 months later [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] because the Warrior can Raid Tank better than monks. Hopefully they will do their research and roll the correct toon for what he would "Like" to do in game the first time around.</P> <P>Although I firmly believe the Vanguard folks will get it right the first time and not release the game before it is running as intended. I am pretty sure they are very familiar with the release of EQ3 and how severly it affected the game mechanics and the characters as a whole and the fact that folks rolled the toons they wanted and then months later were told they had to "relearn" their "New" characters.</P> <P>Looking forward to try Vanguard out.. Looks appealing so far <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P><p>Message Edited by Trook on <span class=date_text>10-28-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:24 AM</span>

Prufro

10-28-2005, 04:38 PM

<div></div><span><blockquote><hr>Shakir1065 wrote:<div><blockquote><hr>Gaige wrote:<p>Yeah, luckily for you Vanguard currently only has 4 tank classes, which can all tank equally well. LoL. They are using the same system EQ2 is. Of course I'm sure you don't want to hear that.</p><p>Monks are uber in Vanguard anyway.</p><hr></blockquote>Gaige, you should go read up on it a bit more. They want all classes to have a specific role. Wariors will be the best raid tanks in that game. Yes all the others can do it, but wariors will be best. But you can stay here where leather men rule.</div><hr></blockquote>It sounds to me like Gaige is the only one actually doing the reading here.You guys can read the FAQ until you're blue in the face, it was created quite a while ago. Read through the forums. Here's what Gaige is talking about...</span> In the "<a href="http://www.vanguardsoh.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=405858#post405858" target="_blank">Aha!!! Classes!!! Need some feedback here.</a>" thread,<span class="minortext"><span><b> Elidroth</b></span> was spotted 08-08-2005 at 12:39 AM saying: </span><img src="http://www.silkyvenom.com/images/spacer.gif" alt="" height="1" width="25"><img src="http://www.silkyvenom.com/images/spacer.gif" alt="" height="1" width="24"><div><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr>Originally Posted by <b>Feldron</b><i>Which of the heavy fighters will be the most armored tank</i><hr></blockquote> All of them. The heavy fighters all tank equally well. It's how they go about their other activities that really define the class. You will still have reasons for wanting one tank over another given a specific situation, but all of them will take a punch just as well as the others. I know some people want to know every little detail before they ever get to play the game, but where's the fun in that? So if we're a little vague at times, it's usually in order to preserve the sense of exploration and discovery about that particular facet of the game.</div>The one thing they are not going to have is an avoidance tank since they believe it's so impossible to truly balance. But all tanks will be tanking equal. Here's a great site that has all the dev responses, searchable even. <a href="http://www.silkyvenom.com/?search=tank&page=devtracker" target=_blank>http://www.silkyvenom.com/?search=tank&page=devtracker</a><div></div>

Yrield

10-28-2005, 04:40 PM

<span><blockquote><hr>Shakir1065 wrote:<div> <blockquote> <hr> Gaige wrote: <p>Yeah, luckily for you Vanguard currently only has 4 tank classes, which can all tank equally well. LoL. They are using the same system EQ2 is. Of course I'm sure you don't want to hear that.</p> <p>Monks are uber in Vanguard anyway.</p> <hr> </blockquote>Gaige, you should go read up on it a bit more. They want all classes to have a specific role. Wariors will be the best raid tanks in that game. Yes all the others can do it, but wariors will be best. But you can stay here where leather men rule. </div><hr></blockquote>Actualy you should read up on it a bit more. "</span><i>They also provide a way to group like skills and abilities. <u>Each class has a primary role they perform, but they also have a secondary role that can and will vary wildly. Our goal is to make each class in a job distinct in style, abilities, and feel,<b> yet still do the job as well as another class in that job.</b></u></i>" <b>Protective Fighters</b> Dread Knight Inquisitor Paladin Warrior "<b><i>The warrior (as well as the other protective fighters) is the meat shield, the tank. He will however have DPS that WILL contribute to the fight when not in a tanking role. If any class is useless unless performing their specific role, then we have failed as designers, and quite honestly, we're not going to fail.</i> -<i> Elidroth" </i></b>Sound like an hybrid Protective Figther/Light fighter eh ? <span>:smileywink:</span> <div></div>

Nemi

10-28-2005, 04:50 PM

<FONT color=#ffff00>You can post facts, developer posts till you're blue in the face to these people it doesn't matter. All they are interested in is being uber, the best, numero uno, top dog. They fail to realise this is poor game design.</FONT>

Gyilok

10-28-2005, 05:43 PM

monks should just be deleted from the fantasy scene and head back to kungfu movies where they belong

Prufro

10-28-2005, 06:05 PM

<span><blockquote><hr>Nemi wrote:<font color="#ffff00">You can post facts, developer posts till you're blue in the face to these people it doesn't matter. All they are interested in is being uber, the best, numero uno, top dog. They fail to realise this is poor game design.</font> <div></div><hr></blockquote>True. They don't seem to realize that right now they can be a warrior in WoW and the best and only tank AND have awesome dps.</span><div></div>

Gungo

10-28-2005, 06:17 PM

haha some of these guards posts are funny. No matter how many direct qoutes or facts they get they come crying with the same stuff the next day or they just attack the poster's character. Fact all fighters are meant to tank equal in eq2. Fact although i didn't know about it until now there are 4 Equal tanks in vanguard. My guess is alot of guards here will role warriors up in vanguard and cry again when paladins, deathknights. and inquisitors are just as good tanks there and get spells. <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><BR>"They don't seem to realize that right now they can be a warrior in WoW and the best and only tank AND have awesome dps."</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Best advice is right there WoW has 1 real tank if thats the game you want. its alot simpler and less complicated and should fit your playstyles better.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV><p>Message Edited by Gungo on <span class=date_text>10-28-2005</span> <span class=time_text>07:20 AM</span>

Sasaki Koji

10-28-2005, 06:49 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gungo wrote:<BR> haha some of these guards posts are funny. No matter how many direct qoutes or facts they get they come crying with the same stuff the next day or they just attack the poster's character. Fact all fighters are meant to tank equal in eq2. Fact although i didn't know about it until now there are 4 Equal tanks in vanguard. My guess is alot of guards here will role warriors up in vanguard and cry again when paladins, deathknights. and inquisitors are just as good tanks there and get spells. <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><BR>"They don't seem to realize that right now they can be a warrior in WoW and the best and only tank AND have awesome dps."</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Best advice is right there WoW has 1 real tank if thats the game you want. its alot simpler and less complicated and should fit your playstyles better.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <P>Message Edited by Gungo on <SPAN class=date_text>10-28-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>07:20 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>/agree. If people dont like the fact that all fighters can tank equally effective, then WoW and/or Vanguard is the game for them.

Veshtan

10-28-2005, 06:53 PM

<P>I don't mind that the other classes can tank just as well as us. I just feel if you balance that, you need to balance everything else amongst them too....and they haven't done that. I'd even say that doesn't mean they aren't going to except that MG has posted before that they feel Guard balance is fine. I think they're wrong, and most Guards do. How some of us go about stating that opinion can be rather off, i will admit, but not all of us are whiny little children. I promise :smileyvery-happy:</P> <P> </P> <P>On a side note, i think it's very hard to make a class called a Guardian, say they are the best defensive fighter, and not have people conjure up the image that they are going to be the primo tank. I think they can give us things that will make us more defensive oriented....debuffs instead of high DPS, perhaps a group ward (Yes, Nemi, i liked that idea). It's just hard for some people to seperate Guard from best tank anymore. /shrug (i've posted in other threads about wanting the same DPS, i really don't, but we used to have a bunch of Debuffs on our skills,and SOE took them all away, God only knows why, so i guess they don't want us to have them, i'd still rather have that then DPS, but you gotta fight for what you think you might get, eh? )</P>

Allowin

10-28-2005, 07:04 PM

<DIV>^----------- typical bruiser garbage.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>if you got your haed of of your you-know-where. you would see that the guardians DONT want to be the most uber of uber tanks.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>i myself dont care if little sissy boys like you want to tank in your leather strap on's. thats fine. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>but when you are playing "caige the dancing brusier tank" I WANT TO BE ABLE TO DO DPS!!!!</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>simple as that. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>ive said all along that i care 0 if bruisers monks or even antonia bayle can tank as good as me. but i want to be able to dps if im not chosen as tank.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>all fighter class should be equal right?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>well give me the dps/utility of a bruiser/monks or the heals/wards/lifetaps of a pally/sk and ill be a happy non-tanking guardian</DIV>

Dart

10-28-2005, 07:12 PM

Prufro

10-28-2005, 07:15 PM

<div></div><span><blockquote><hr>Allowin wrote:<div>^----------- typical bruiser garbage.</div> <div> </div> <div> </div> <div> </div> <div>if you got your haed of of your you-know-where. you would see that the guardians DONT want to be the most uber of uber tanks.</div> <div> </div> <div> </div> <div>i myself dont care if little sissy boys like you want to tank in your leather strap on's. thats fine. </div> <div> </div> <div>but when you are playing "caige the dancing brusier tank" I WANT TO BE ABLE TO DO DPS!!!!</div> <div> </div> <div> </div> <div> </div> <div>simple as that. </div> <div> </div> <div> </div> <div>ive said all along that i care 0 if bruisers monks or even antonia bayle can tank as good as me. but i want to be able to dps if im not chosen as tank.</div> <div> </div> <div> </div> <div>all fighter class should be equal right?</div> <div> </div> <div> </div> <div>well give me the dps/utility of a bruiser/monks or the heals/wards/lifetaps of a pally/sk and ill be a happy non-tanking guardian</div><hr></blockquote>This is a rude emotion filled response that uses biases in order to get it's point across. Using stereotypes not only for bruisers, but also for guardians, is not the best thing to do. There are guardians on this forum that want to be the uber tanks, there are also guardians on the forum that want dps, and ones that want utility, and ones that are happy with the way they are. It seems like a lot of guardians are really just asking for a role when not the maintank. I don't see any reason this shouldn't be implemented, but Rajinn has stated they are really looking into our class, and all of the information is top secret, so at some point they will do something. Until then, maybe you guys who are so unhappy should just take a break. Some of you have and rolled alts, great idea. Guardians wont get the dps/utility of bruisers/monks because that's what defines them outside of being an equal tank. We also wont get heals/wards/lifetaps because that's what defines paladins and shadowknights. There's nothing that defines guardians yet, but they're brainstorming, and working on trying to find a unique feature that we can have. You just have to wait. But keep in mind, when they do find it, you might not like it. But it will be the guardian class, and they wont go and change it because some people don't like it. </span><div></div><p>Message Edited by Prufrock on <span class=date_text>10-28-2005</span> <span class=time_text>08:18 AM</span>

Shizzirri

10-28-2005, 07:26 PM

Keep in mind the dev's in this game we're the ones in EQ1 that goofed up the warrior class (agro issues mainly)

RafaelSmith

10-28-2005, 07:29 PM

<span><blockquote><hr>Prufrock wrote:<div></div><span><blockquote><hr></blockquote> Guardians wont get the dps/utility of bruisers/monks because that's what defines them outside of being an equal tank. We also wont get heals/wards/lifetaps because that's what defines paladins and shadowknights. There's nothing that defines guardians yet, but they're brainstorming, and working on trying to find a unique feature that we can have. You just have to wait. But keep in mind, when they do find it, you might not like it. But it will be the guardian class, and they wont go and change it because some people don't like it. </span><div></div><p>Message Edited by Prufrock on <span class="date_text">10-28-2005</span> <span class="time_text">08:18 AM</span></p><hr></blockquote> In approximately 14days EQ2 will be 1 year old (release wise) ...who knows how old since development actually started (alpha, beta, etc). To have a class undefined at this point is sad...whats even more sad is players that continue to except this sorta stuff form the developers and are content with just "waiting"...all the while defending the DEVS for their complete lack of vision or understanding of how things are actually playing out in the game. Brainstorming is something you do during the conceptual/preliminary stages of design...not a year after production. The game is fundementally flawed, they know it...we know it and noone knows what to do about it so we are doomed to have bandaid fix after bandaid fix. </span><div></div>

Prufro

10-28-2005, 07:40 PM

<span><blockquote><hr>RafaelSmith wrote:<span><blockquote><hr>Prufrock wrote:<div></div><span><blockquote><hr></blockquote> Guardians wont get the dps/utility of bruisers/monks because that's what defines them outside of being an equal tank. We also wont get heals/wards/lifetaps because that's what defines paladins and shadowknights. There's nothing that defines guardians yet, but they're brainstorming, and working on trying to find a unique feature that we can have. You just have to wait. But keep in mind, when they do find it, you might not like it. But it will be the guardian class, and they wont go and change it because some people don't like it. </span><div></div><p>Message Edited by Prufrock on <span class="date_text">10-28-2005</span> <span class="time_text">08:18 AM</span></p><hr></blockquote> In approximately 14days EQ2 will be 1 year old (release wise) ...who knows how old since development actually started (alpha, beta, etc). To have a class undefined at this point is sad...whats even more sad is players that continue to except this sorta stuff form the developers and are content with just "waiting"...all the while defending the DEVS for their complete lack of vision or understanding of how things are actually playing out in the game. Brainstorming is something you do during the conceptual/preliminary stages of design...not a year after production. The game is fundementally flawed, they know it...we know it and noone knows what to do about it so we are doomed to have bandaid fix after bandaid fix.</span><div></div><hr></blockquote>Here's an idea. Write an MMO, and make it so that every class and ability is so perfect that for the entire lifespan of the MMO you never have to change a single thing. I'll give you 10 years to do it. Or here's another idea. Find a popular MMO that didn't require drastic changes to classes throughout it's lifetime in order to keep things balanced and fit the needs of it's players. (I'm going to follow this by stating that ffxi does not count. Why? Because they don't have forums, they do the game they want to and people play the game the devs want them to play and it's a great game for it. Forums are the bane of MMOs because it gives people the idea that if they ask for what they want they will get it.) If you haven't been following WoW lately, every patch they're making huge talent changes to one or more classes in order to help balance them out. If you really think SOE can't design MMOs and this game is so flawed that we're "doomed to have bandaid fix after bandaid fix" then why the heck are you still playing?</span><div></div>

Veshtan

10-28-2005, 08:00 PM

<P>You know...it's funny how if you don't say something mean about brawlers...they never respond to your post. /grin</P> <P>Anyway...Pruf is probably right...as much as i HATE admitting it, because i want changes made that are more then just a token ability of our own...we'll probably get this top secret fix....and it will probably be a spell that allows us to summon 6-jello pudding packs to distribute amongst the groupmates to keep them smiling. Unless they don't like pudding..or are lactose intolerant like my wife....then you'll just end up having to clean your armor after it gets thrown at you.</P> <P> </P>

Nemi

10-28-2005, 08:04 PM

<P>**REMOVED INAPPROPRIATE POST AND FLAME BAIT**</P><p>Message Edited by Raijinn Thunderguard on <span class=date_text>10-31-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:29 AM</span>

Creppie

10-28-2005, 08:28 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> TunaBoo wrote:<BR>eqoa got monks right, they are kung fu brothers of rangers.<BR> <P></P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Diablo II got berzerkers right too... oh wait different game just like EQOA.

Tro

10-28-2005, 10:19 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nemi wrote:<BR><FONT color=#ffff00>You can post facts, developer posts till you're blue in the face to these people it doesn't matter. All they are interested in is being uber, the best, numero uno, top dog. They fail to realise this is poor game design.</FONT> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I for one have gotten use to my "New" guardian.. Please don't group all of us in that "Want to be Uber" catagory. I will admit I do not like the guard changes but am learning to get use to them. My main [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] is the way they came about. </P> <P>When I rolled my guard months ago, after all the research and advice from my guildies, the toon I was looking for was the Guardian as the best mitigation/defensive tank in the game. Thats what I got as did many others. I was very happy playing the game at that point. That was the way guards were at that time because SoE designed them that way. That was not OUR fault. </P> <P>But wait.. Here comes LU#13.. </P> <P>Nowhere in that SoE documentation did I see a statement saying "Enjoy your character while you can because a few months down the road, your current character will change to the point you will have to "relearn" how to play it.. </P> <P>Thats not what I was lead to believe would happen from the start, but here we are.. </P> <P>One more thing, In YOUR opinion it is a "Poor" design. It has worked out very well in EQ1 and continues to but you are entitled to your opinion. </P> <P>Either way, I will surely check out Vanguard when it is released..</P>

Ironmeow

10-28-2005, 10:25 PM

<DIV>im sure they are working on something to fix us, they are just letting us simmer in our own stew so we look like [Removed for Content] when the fix comes.</DIV>

Nemi

10-28-2005, 11:18 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Trook wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I for one have gotten use to my "New" guardian.. Please don't group all of us in that "Want to be Uber" catagory.</P> <P> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>I have already explained in the post above 'these people' was specifically chosen instead of Guardians. I'm well aware the silent majority work within the archetype role and also that Guardians need some flavour, utility dps injected.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </P> <P>One more thing, In YOUR opinion it is a "Poor" design. It has worked out very well in EQ1 and continues to but you are entitled to your opinion.</P> <P> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Bad wording. I meant bad game design for EQ2. WoW has done it successfully although I wouldn't say it worked well for EQ1. There were many years of teeth gnashing to get to where they are today. Lots of threads on Knights vs Warriors and inability of chain classes to tank or Rogues do DPS. But I digress, for a system built on Archetype balance, having one above others is poor.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </P> <P>Either way, I will surely check out Vanguard when it is released..</P> <P> </P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Doesn't float my boat. If I want another job where I'm [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] on, I'll go apply at McDonalds.</FONT><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

Raahl

10-28-2005, 11:24 PM

<DIV>Monks and Brawlers should do what they want to do. They want to tank? That's fine by me. Just leave us Guardians alone.</DIV>

Grumpy_Warrior_01

10-29-2005, 12:04 AM

<P>**REMOVED INAPPROPRIATE POST AND FLAME BAIT**</P><p>Message Edited by Raijinn Thunderguard on <span class=date_text>10-31-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:30 AM</span>

Pry

10-29-2005, 12:12 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Grumpy_Warrior_01 wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Raahl wrote:<BR> <DIV>Monks and Brawlers should do what they want to do.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>And why are you singling out certain classes? Trying to be the god class again? Well SOE disagrees with your antiquated logic. This is not eq1 and you will just have to accept that you're not the /godmode gods you were pre-LU13. Class-bashing just wont work here, sorry.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV> They want to tank?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>There's four classes in this game -- fighter, mage, scout and healer. SOE's job is to balance tank classes, and you whining guardians are just going to have to accept that brawlers are tanks. So you've been balanced and now all you can do is whine that other classes want to tank and your godmode doesnt work anymore. Sorry, back of the bus.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV>That's fine by me.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Fine by you? What about the rest of us? There are six tank classes in this game. I am a tank. And therefore I am one of those classes. You just want this to become EQ1 again. Go ahead and repost developer quotes until you are blue in the face, you whining guardians are just begging for your godmode, mostest-uber status from pre-LU13 and are in denial that I am a tank.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Just leave us Guardians alone.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Yeah right, leave you alone to become the uber god-mode class you were pre-LU13. I am a tank, i always have been a tank but you whining guardians were so full of yourselves stepping all over the other classes before LU13. All you are interested in is being the best, numero uno, top dog. And I am a tank btw.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>I'm not interested in being #1. In fact, I am thinking that the number of times I actually wanted to be MT as a Guardian were zero. Often times, I would have a whole cocophony of Fighter classes MT in a group I was in. Same with raids.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Oh I know, your rebuttal will be that I sucked as a tank and that is why I didn't want to do it. Maybe so, or maybe pre-LU13 we actually knew how to play our classes and didn't need to rely on one class to do anything. Most adult casual players have had to have unorthodox group and raid makeups for a long time. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>My arguments balance solely on the fact that playing a Guardian post LU13 is worse than going to the Dentist. It's a boretacular, it's a yawnraviganza. I don't care what happens with 15 other classes, nerf them, buff them up, do whatever. Just don't make me waste my precious time by giving me a product I like and changing it to suit whiners in one (or all) of the other 15 classes. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>And saying "uber god-mode" by the way makes you sound like an illiterate. Germans are laughing at you. </DIV>

Dart

10-29-2005, 01:22 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Grumpy_Warrior_01 wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Raahl wrote:<BR> <DIV>Monks and Brawlers should do what they want to do.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>And why are you singling out certain classes? Trying to be the god class again? Well SOE disagrees with your antiquated logic. This is not eq1 and you will just have to accept that you're not the /godmode gods you were pre-LU13. Class-bashing just wont work here, sorry.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV> They want to tank?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>There's four classes in this game -- fighter, mage, scout and healer. SOE's job is to balance tank classes, and you whining guardians are just going to have to accept that brawlers are tanks. So you've been balanced and now all you can do is whine that other classes want to tank and your godmode doesnt work anymore. Sorry, back of the bus.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV>That's fine by me.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Fine by you? What about the rest of us? There are six tank classes in this game. I am a tank. And therefore I am one of those classes. You just want this to become EQ1 again. Go ahead and repost developer quotes until you are blue in the face, you whining guardians are just begging for your godmode, mostest-uber status from pre-LU13 and are in denial that I am a tank.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Just leave us Guardians alone.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Yeah right, leave you alone to become the uber god-mode class you were pre-LU13. I am a tank, i always have been a tank but you whining guardians were so full of yourselves stepping all over the other classes before LU13. All you are interested in is being the best, numero uno, top dog. And I am a tank btw.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <P><BR> </P> <P>HAHA, I had a nice post to respond to yours here, but I will sum it up for you (Ever watch Carlos Mencia on Comedy central?) well you my friend are /dee dee dee. Now get back on that short bus and put your diaper back on.</P> <P> </P> <P> </P> <P> </P></BLOCKQUOTE>

Gaige

10-29-2005, 01:28 AM

<P>Honestly guys. I know you love to flame me, I understand. But you need to actually research Vanguard before you find yourself with the same complaints on their forums. While you may not like what I say, it is the truth. They have an archetype system also, and any of the 4 tank classes can fulfill the primary role (tanking) equally well. They only way they are different is their utility or "secondary abilities" as Brad likes to say.</P> <P> </P>

Moralpanic

10-29-2005, 01:46 AM

<span><blockquote><hr>Sasaki Kojiro wrote:<div></div> <div>Bruce Lee can kick Sir Lancelots Butt!</div><hr></blockquote> Yes, that's what Bruce Lee WOULD be doing... KICKING BUTT. Doing DAMAGE. Not SOAKING it.</span><div></div>

Greyto

10-29-2005, 01:59 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <P>Honestly guys. I know you love to flame me, I understand. But you need to actually research Vanguard before you find yourself with the same complaints on their forums. While you may not like what I say, it is the truth. They have an archetype system also, and any of the 4 tank classes can fulfill the primary role (tanking) equally well. They only way they are different is their utility or "secondary abilities" as Brad likes to say.</P> <P> </P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>well I know I like to flame ya <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> but yeah ALL tanks will be able to tank over in Vangaurd BUT what each of them will or will not be able to do will be upfront and not a blindsiding nerf that goes against even their own game manual.</P> <P>a pretty big difference from the "oh no that was lore it did not mean anything" BS we have going on here and the approach we are seeing out of Sigil.</P> <P>Gaige lol you know this whole I am faithful till the end is just lip service. This game is just like it's lead developer a leaf in the wind. Even you will get sick of it and move on. especially when your guild is gone and you are standing there all alone ready to tank and no where to go.</P> <DIV>It is getting to the point with me I have just about given up hope for this game. It is nothing like what was promised I was at the Chicago fan fair and the Vegas fan fairs I went to the seminars, just as you did. Not even you in all your Fanbio glory can say this game is even a fraction of the promise it could/should have been. Not even close....</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>SO yeah I will take all tanks tanking the same if that is how it is from the start and I have a chance to study which class I will play.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>scraping a character 1-2 months into a game is nothing scraping a character a year after release in a BS thing to do to your customers.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

Grumpy_Warrior_01

10-29-2005, 02:06 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Darton wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Grumpy_Warrior_01 wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Raahl wrote:<BR> <DIV>Monks and Brawlers should do what they want to do.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>And why are you singling out certain classes? Trying to be the god class again? Well SOE disagrees with your antiquated logic. This is not eq1 and you will just have to accept that you're not the /godmode gods you were pre-LU13. Class-bashing just wont work here, sorry.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV> They want to tank?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>There's four classes in this game -- fighter, mage, scout and healer. SOE's job is to balance tank classes, and you whining guardians are just going to have to accept that brawlers are tanks. So you've been balanced and now all you can do is whine that other classes want to tank and your godmode doesnt work anymore. Sorry, back of the bus.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV>That's fine by me.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Fine by you? What about the rest of us? There are six tank classes in this game. I am a tank. And therefore I am one of those classes. You just want this to become EQ1 again. Go ahead and repost developer quotes until you are blue in the face, you whining guardians are just begging for your godmode, mostest-uber status from pre-LU13 and are in denial that I am a tank.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Just leave us Guardians alone.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Yeah right, leave you alone to become the uber god-mode class you were pre-LU13. I am a tank, i always have been a tank but you whining guardians were so full of yourselves stepping all over the other classes before LU13. All you are interested in is being the best, numero uno, top dog. And I am a tank btw.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <P><BR> </P> <P>HAHA, I had a nice post to respond to yours here, but I will sum it up for you (Ever watch Carlos Mencia on Comedy central?) well you my friend are /dee dee dee. Now get back on that short bus and put your diaper back on.</P> <P> </P> <P> </P> <P> </P></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>OMG guys we ALL need to lighten up here a little. I guess I have to explain this post. I was posting a PARODY to Nemi's yellow-on-white style of constantly pounding out rebuttals to every single word we say with the same old tired breathless lines. I am beyond amazed that anyone who visits these boards even rarely would miss that. My funny bone must not be as well-developed as I thought. :smileywink: Everyone back to sulking, nothing to see here. Sorry for any confusion. Geez.</P> <P> </P>

Greyto

10-29-2005, 02:07 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> RafaelSmith wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>In approximately 14days EQ2 will be 1 year old (release wise) ...who knows how old since development actually started (alpha, beta, etc). To have a class undefined at this point is sad...whats even more sad is players that continue to except this sorta stuff form the developers and are content with just "waiting"...all the while defending the DEVS for their complete lack of vision or understanding of how things are actually playing out in the game.<BR><BR>Brainstorming is something you do during the conceptual/preliminary stages of design...not a year after production. <BR><BR>The game is fundementally flawed, they know it...we know it and noone knows what to do about it so we are doomed to have bandaid fix after bandaid fix.<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>This is stright to the point and pure fact. Well said. It is the reason I am moving on. Yes all those who say Vanguard will have its flaws you may be right but the fact is I have given this game a year. how much longer do they need to get it right?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>and for those of you who claim the way the game is now IS right. then it is just one more reason for me to move on. </DIV>

Greyto

10-29-2005, 02:25 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Grumpy_Warrior_01 wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><BR>OMG guys we ALL need to lighten up here a little. I guess I have to explain this post. I was posting a PARODY to Nemi's yellow-on-white style of constantly pounding out rebuttals to every single word we say with the same old tired breathless lines. I am beyond amazed that anyone who visits these boards even rarely would miss that. My funny bone must not be as well-developed as I thought. :smileywink: Everyone back to sulking, nothing to see here. Sorry for any confusion. Geez.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>LOL Grump replying to that [<EM>expletive ninja'd before SOE could HAH!!!"</EM>]<EM> </EM>is the most worthless waste of time I could ever imagine one person doing to kill even the most monotonous portion of their day. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>man you must have been bored silly to have even considered it.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

Dart

10-29-2005, 02:56 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Grumpy_Warrior_01 wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Darton wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Grumpy_Warrior_01 wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Raahl wrote:<BR> <DIV>Monks and Brawlers should do what they want to do.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>And why are you singling out certain classes? Trying to be the god class again? Well SOE disagrees with your antiquated logic. This is not eq1 and you will just have to accept that you're not the /godmode gods you were pre-LU13. Class-bashing just wont work here, sorry.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV> They want to tank?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>There's four classes in this game -- fighter, mage, scout and healer. SOE's job is to balance tank classes, and you whining guardians are just going to have to accept that brawlers are tanks. So you've been balanced and now all you can do is whine that other classes want to tank and your godmode doesnt work anymore. Sorry, back of the bus.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV>That's fine by me.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Fine by you? What about the rest of us? There are six tank classes in this game. I am a tank. And therefore I am one of those classes. You just want this to become EQ1 again. Go ahead and repost developer quotes until you are blue in the face, you whining guardians are just begging for your godmode, mostest-uber status from pre-LU13 and are in denial that I am a tank.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Just leave us Guardians alone.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Yeah right, leave you alone to become the uber god-mode class you were pre-LU13. I am a tank, i always have been a tank but you whining guardians were so full of yourselves stepping all over the other classes before LU13. All you are interested in is being the best, numero uno, top dog. And I am a tank btw.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <P><BR> </P> <P>HAHA, I had a nice post to respond to yours here, but I will sum it up for you (Ever watch Carlos Mencia on Comedy central?) well you my friend are /dee dee dee. Now get back on that short bus and put your diaper back on.</P> <P> </P> <P> </P> <P> </P></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>OMG guys we ALL need to lighten up here a little. I guess I have to explain this post. I was posting a PARODY to Nemi's yellow-on-white style of constantly pounding out rebuttals to every single word we say with the same old tired breathless lines. I am beyond amazed that anyone who visits these boards even rarely would miss that. My funny bone must not be as well-developed as I thought. :smileywink: Everyone back to sulking, nothing to see here. Sorry for any confusion. Geez.</P> <P> </P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>In that event you have my full apology. So much hate on the boards, I lost track of the sarcasm.</P> <P> </P> <P>Ya'll have a great weekend! </P>

Greyto

10-29-2005, 03:46 AM

<DIV>Dart, I hope ya know that you are not the [<EM>expletive ninja'd before SOE could HAH!!!"</EM>] I was referring to.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You have a great weekend too <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV>

Ladicav

10-29-2005, 04:16 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Greytoon wrote:<BR><BR> <DIV>This is stright to the point and pure fact. Well said. It is the reason I am moving on. Yes all those who say Vanguard will have its flaws you may be right but the fact is I have given this game a year. how much longer do they need to get it right?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>and for those of you who claim the way the game is now IS right. then it is just one more reason for me to move on. </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Yes, I have to agree here. It is a good point. After nearly 12 months already gone how much longer do they need to get it right?? It's not just Guardians that is the issue, the game has a 100 bazzillion issues. After DoF and LU13 they had 100 bazzillion + 10 issues. Can I wait around for another 12 months hoping classes will have become balanced, raids will have become fairer, mobs will be more aligned with their correct power, raid loot becomes more in tune with the power of the creatures and and and <throw in whatever else you like>. These kind of things are beta testing issues and really can be found pretty easily within the offices of SOE with some extensive software testing. This shouldn't be happening in live environment, where you are paying to wait around and hope things get fixed.</P> <P>I play the game currently despite all these things, but there are times where I'm in a group or raid and I have to face them and I just have to wonder what the hell is going on at the offices of SOE. They feed us half finished expansions and unbalanced bug ridden updates and we lap them up and then argue on the boards about it?? I thought gamers were meant to be astute, if a game isn't measuring up then it just isn't measuring up. They change the class system and people claim oh but there are dev posts saying it was meant to be this way. How is some new player going to know this. They have to trudge into posts found in some obscure place?? Should they even need to?? I for one, didn't. I bought the game on face value read the manaul and the descriptions on the site and that is as far as I feel as I needed to go. The site and manual should give them enough accurate starting information without having to chase down some half [Removed for Content] post in some corner somewhere. Seriously.</P> <P>So yes, if people claim that the game currently as it is now <STRONG>IS</STRONG> right, then whoa, you have some mighty low standards in my opinion. SOE has a boatload of work to bring EQ2 up to speed. I've played MMORPGs in beta mode which had less issues.</P>

spa

10-29-2005, 09:22 AM

<DIV>Sigil has a heavy amount of experianced developers under their table. SoE however hasnt, they got some.</DIV> <DIV>Brad McQuiad is a MMOG god, he and not many others were the reason why EQ1 was so successfull. When SoE took over - the subcription numbers didnt go up. SoE made and released EQ2, subscriptions dont go up.</DIV> <DIV>WoW's developers are how do i say... not exactly experianced with MMOG's. So guys, no point in giving the old - Vanguard is a simple, dumbed down game -- just like WoW is, your words not mine. Sigil Online have the best of the best developers and a huge company like Microsoft backing it to make a truely awesome MMORPG that EQ1 was and is. Theres a reason why many many EQ1 players have gone back to EQ1 after trying EQ2, just shows how addictive and cool EQ2 is meant to be...</DIV>

Gaige

10-29-2005, 10:37 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> spark wrote:<BR> <DIV>Sigil has a heavy amount of experianced developers under their table. SoE however hasnt, they got some.</DIV> <DIV>Brad McQuiad is a MMOG god, he and not many others were the reason why EQ1 was so successfull. When SoE took over - the subcription numbers didnt go up. SoE made and released EQ2, subscriptions dont go up.</DIV> <DIV>WoW's developers are how do i say... not exactly experianced with MMOG's. So guys, no point in giving the old - Vanguard is a simple, dumbed down game -- just like WoW is, your words not mine. Sigil Online have the best of the best developers and a huge company like Microsoft backing it to make a truely awesome MMORPG that EQ1 was and is. Theres a reason why many many EQ1 players have gone back to EQ1 after trying EQ2, just shows how addictive and cool EQ2 is meant to be... <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>Please tell me you aren't serious?<BR>

Grumpy_Warrior_01

10-31-2005, 03:44 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Starwind87 wrote:<BR> <P>You want to know exactly why Gaige was railing on Guardians and calling for a change so much pre- LU13? It may not have been because he wanted to be the best, but I'll guarantee that somewhere in the back of his mind it had something to do with the fact that there was a class that was the "best" and it wasn't his class. He may not have wanted to take the position himself, but he didn't want someone else to have it if he couldn't.<BR><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Yep, you're quite perceptive. I believe that's called the crab bucket theory. Google produced this link, check out the article that runs down the middle of the page. It's a quick, interesting read about human nature:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><A href="http://www.crabbucketrescue.com/crabbuckets.htm" target=_blank>http://www.crabbucketrescue.com/crabbuckets.htm</A></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> And you can always tell which ones are industriously stacking the deck in their favor: It's the ones that can never seem to shut up. Look around you. At work, at school, wherever you find a community. And beware of the ones that flit around from group to group filling every available ear with pudding day after day.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

Ladicav

10-31-2005, 05:51 AM

<P>Yes I agree, I think there was a lot of people who should have rolled a Guardian to start with, because really, lets face it, they wanted the same things a Guardian had, mostly the defensive side of things. Playing their chars to high levels they suddenly realise their archetypes took them down a different road, which was fun for a while, but they had already invested all the time and effort and heaven forbid having to do all those quests again. So instead of facing the reality and re-rolling a Guardian, it is just easier to bellow and bellow and yell and scream until you get your way. In the end, this just ends up having classes that get left out in the cold.</P> <P>Personally I do not care if other classes tank things, I have seen monks pre-LU13 that tanked in many group environments just fine. I know one particular monk with real skill that could hold agro just fine on multi mob encounters, so much so you would have thought he had AOE taunt. Orange con ^^^ were just like any other mob to him. I don't believe in the whole monks could not tank thing, because I know it not to be true. I'm happy for all of Beserkers, Monks, Bruisers, Paladins and Shadowknights to tank things using their own skills.</P> <P>However, screwing up Guardians in a rob Peter to pay Paul style change just does not cut it and you guys can jump up and down screaming well this is what Guardians should be now! Well how would you know? I do not see people in a hurry to make Guardians anymore and I'm sure those who screamed to get everything changed, wouldn't play a Guardian with a 10 foot pole any longer. Pre-LU 13 all was needed was a few well defined, well placed changes. What we got, is unexplainable, so much so that the devs couldn't work out what Guardians should be either, other then unsung heroes, and what does that mean anyway?</P> <P>It does not matter if Vanguard comes around tomorrow or whatever uber MMORPG is around the corner, I just know that Everquest 2, is never going to be the juggernaut it promised it could be. If the devs didn't screw around with the whole combat balance of the game so late in its development, people looking at EQ2 may have more confidence. But it never looks good in any environment when wholesale changes are made, it just does not inspire confidence. Despite all the really lovely graphics, it is destined to be a transient game, by which I mean as soon as something better comes along, many people will shift.</P> <p>Message Edited by Ladicav on <span class=date_text>10-30-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:54 PM</span>

spa

10-31-2005, 08:53 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote: <P>In the end though I doubt Vanguard ever does more than maybe 250k sustained subscribers because <EM>its scope and vision are so limited.</EM></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Umm, i thought Vanguards scope and vision offers more than EQ2, if not more then equivelant..</DIV> <DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> The game is going to be challenging. <BR><BR>The game is going to focus on character advancement, item acquisition, and interdependence to build community and teamwork. <BR><BR>If I had to compare it to another game, take original EQ, Kunark, and Velious -- that sort of challenge. <BR><BR>One of our big goals is bring back the challenge we feel is being abandoned in MMOGs as of late, but without a lot of the tedium. We want travel to be fun, and there to not be a lot of teleporting around. We want exploration to be key and for you feel compelled and then rewarded for exploring and traveling. <BR><BR>We really don't want camping, where you sit in one spot waiting for a spawn. We have plans to have our encounter system strongly encouraging moving around, 'doing' a dungeon. We want to have cool vehicles, whether they be horses that you can equip and also use for storage that help you move across land; we want you to own ships and sail the oceans, but not empty oceans -- oceans filled with content as well -- sea monsters, pirates, and lots of little islands en route to your destination. <BR><BR>Additionally we will have areas that are more geared for one of the categories: casual, group, and raid. The casual areas require less of a contiguous time commitment and you don't need a full group. The grouping areas, well, require you to group. Think classic, old school grouping. Then the raid areas, well that's pretty obvious. <BR><BR>Both risk and reward will be present, however, so one shouldn't expect to see as much of a reward in a casual area vs a group area. It's something to do when you have less time, and it should be fun, but you're not going to get the fiery scimitar of ultimate doom in a casual region. <BR><BR>Also, our crafting system is there and arguably just as important as the adventuring side of things. So if your buddies aren't on one evening yet you still want to play, you could go and hone your crafting skills, and then return to adventuring the next evening when the guild logs on and off you go. <BR><BR>The interface and character class selection is also somewhat newbie oriented if you want it to be. We don't want to beat the noob over the head with all the depth and detail of the game right off the bat. It's intimidating. So if you choose the noob path to character creation, expected to be gently led into the UI, the gameplay, etc. <BR><BR>Basically, we want to remove as much tedium as possible, as well as barriers to entry. But, and this is key, we strongly feel this is NOT mutually exclusive with making a darn hard and challenging game. Battles will be tough. NPC AI will be smart. Lots of group tactics will be used, with even more collaboration then you've probably seen before, and an even more visceral feel. <BR><BR>Dungeon crawls will be back, and those who risk the depths of these nasty areas and return alive will most likely have some pretty awesome loot. <BR><BR>Death will have a sting, and it's mostly classic corpse retrieval with a few variations like we'll make it easier to find your corpse, yet you'll still have to fight to it. Also, corpses will never truly deteriorate as long as a certain amount of loot is on the corpse. And, the way the game is designed, you are expected and will need by a certain level to start putting together multiple sets of armor (gets into situational stuff that I can't talk a lot about now). In any case, the old 'gotta head back into the dungeon naked to my corpse' should pretty much go away, as you will have spare/alternate set(s) of equipment relatively nearby. <BR><BR>Anyway, tough, yes. Rewarding, yes. Challenging, yes. Tedious, hopefully no. Camping, minimized the best we can. Travel, fun and dangerous in and of itself. Needing to group and work with others to really advance optimally and get the phat lewtz, yes.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Will just have to wait and see how much of that will be available at release. SoE stated almost as much as that for EQ2, but came release half of the game was missing such "Vision" or bugged alot (and still is, but then its a MMO..)</DIV>

Pry

10-31-2005, 10:30 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Prynn wrote:<BR><BR>The difference with Vanguard however is that whatever they are doing is starting out that way. It's not "Here play this class for a year so we can change it later" attitude. So therefore, people aren't going to be surprised by the class that they play no matter what "role" it takes, and have general confidence that they aren't going to be nerfed or used up later. That is the appeal of Vanguard, not that things will (or will not) be necessarily different there.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Oh PLEASE.</P> <P>EQ2 started out that way but didn't work. Sure, I will conceed they took to long to implement the changes and left some people feeling as if their class was intended to operate in its broken and overpowered state... BUT... from the very beginning and prior to release the archetype system was advertised.</P> <P>As for things not getting nerfed in Vanguard, please. <FONT color=#ff0000>Brad was king of the nerf in EQ1.</FONT> Its funny how people only remember the good things about someone/something when they are looking at something with rose colored glasses.</P> <P>The point is EQ2 was designed and implemented with this system in mind, just as Vanguard is. EQ2's original implementation wasn't working as designed so they redid it. The same thing could EASILY happen to Vanguard, as no amount of beta and/or internal testing will figure out issues, especially with balance, as a few hundred thousand live players. Its a MMO just like all others, and Vanguard just like EQ2 will change. Period.</P> <P>The fact is most people want Vanguard to be better than EQ1 because they need it to be. They are unhappy for whatever reason with what is currently on the market and they need a game to be that thing they are looking for. This always happens with new releases. They become so optimistic and full of wishful thinking they create scenarios and things about the game that may or may not even be true.</P> <P>Point is Vanguard may be a minor success. It appeals to a very limited audience in a genre dominated by WoW with tons of competition. Its main audience will be hard pressed to leave EQ1 after years invested, although some will. Some people will leave WoW and EQ2 etc to go to Vanguard because its new.</P> <P>In the end though I doubt Vanguard ever does more than maybe 250k sustained subscribers because its scope and vision are so limited.<BR></P> <P>Message Edited by Gaige on <SPAN class=date_text>10-30-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>02:26 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Funny, my wizard didn't get nerfed until after Brad left and SOE took over. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P>In reality, it doesn't really matter what Vanguard does or does not do. The archtype system in EQ2 is the absolute worst, and it was bad from the beginning and it only got worse as time went on. It only serves to make characters carbon copies of one another. Everyone can achieve the same level as any other character, there is nothing discerning one level 60 toon from another other than what gear/spell level they have. Now the push from folks is to make the line even more sullied, so that not only are archtypes the same, but classes are too. That is going to make a system where there are only 4 real classes, and that is really lame.</P> <P>Balance should be left up to the individual, not the company. </P>

Gaige

10-31-2005, 10:42 AM

<DIV><BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Ladicav wrote:<BR> <P>I know one particular monk with real skill that could hold agro just fine on multi mob encounters, so much so you would have thought he had AOE taunt.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Probably because we do.</DIV> <DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> spark wrote:<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Will just have to wait and see how much of that will be available at release. SoE stated almost as much as that for EQ2, but came release half of the game was missing such "Vision" or bugged alot (and still is, but then its a MMO..) <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>Trust me, I realize what Brad and the devs say. I read their forums and post there. I know a lot about Vanguard. Thanks.</DIV> <DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Prynn wrote:<BR> <P>That is going to make a system where there are only 4 real classes, and that is really lame.</P> <P>Balance should be left up to the individual, not the company.<BR> <HR> <P></P></BLOCKQUOTE>Vanguard is doing almost EXACTLY the same thing. Their "tanks" are based on 4 classes (although all plate and mitigation - no avoidance) and each of them can do the primary role (tanking) equally. They are different only in their secondary skills.</DIV> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P><p>Message Edited by Gaige on <span class=date_text>10-30-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:44 PM</span>

Starwind

10-31-2005, 11:13 AM

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Gaige wrote:<div> <blockquote>Vanguard is doing almost EXACTLY the same thing. Their "tanks" are based on 4 classes (although all plate and mitigation - no avoidance) and each of them can do the primary role (tanking) equally. They are different only in their secondary skills.</blockquote> </div> <p><span class="time_text"></span> </p><p>Message Edited by Gaige on <span class="date_text">10-30-2005</span> <span class="time_text">09:44 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote>Which is what the OP was saying. Monks shouldn't have been tanks. 4 Tank classes are all that are needed. If you'd take out the avoidance tanks (since avoiding a blow isn't tanking, it's just dodging, like scouts do.), and buff guards up some, everything would be fine. You have an Evil hybrid, a Good hybrid, and then you have two neutral warrior classes, one focused on direct/indircet DPS, the other focused on superior taunting and group buffing. That's exactly what's needed, but if you toss in the two avoidance tanks it throws the whole equation out of whack. Because how do you balance avoidance into overall defense? You can't, because avoidance isn't constant and consistent like Mitigation is. You could theoretically go an entire fight without getting hit, or the static opposite; you could theoritically get hit every time. There really isn't a way to balance that, because it's not completely consistent, being based on a percentage chance to avoid like it is. Bottom line - make sure all the Mit tanks have equally powered gear and the same base defense, give them their different specialties (SK- Lifetaps and offensive spells, Pally- Heals and defensive spells, Guardian- Defensive self-buffs and group buffs, Zerker- High melee DPS and group speed/DPS boosters), then just completely eliminate the avoidance tank classes. Either make them scouts, or elminate them entirely and give the people who play them to option to reroll whatever toon they like and have him rebuffed to the level their brawler was, then give them the sum player marktet value of their gear in gold/plat. But to be brutally honest, they should've done that for every archetype in the first place. 4 subclasses for each archetype instead of 6. One evil, one good, two neutral. 6 subclasses for every archetype is just overkill.

Tro

10-31-2005, 04:59 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <BR> <P>Oh PLEASE.</P> <P>EQ2 started out that way but didn't work. Sure, I will conceed they took to long to implement the changes and left some people feeling as if their class was intended to operate in its broken and overpowered state... BUT... from the very beginning and prior to release the archetype system was advertised.<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Took too long? 10 months too long.. Believe what you want gaige but the fact still remains.. LU13 was a MAJOR change in game mechanics. We are not talking a few minor tweaks here and there.. again, a MAJOR change..</P> <P>If SoE had rolled out EQ2 with the LU13 content then, I probably would not have rolled a Guard. I rolled a Guard because I wanted the best mitigation/defensive tank and the Guardian was the choice at that time. So thats what I got and I was very happy with it. 10 months later all that has changed.</P> <P>And yes the archtype system was advertised well before release.. we all knew it and that was fine.. but when I was doing the research to figure out what subclass was the best mit/def tank, nowhere in the SOE docs/websites did I see a statement to the tune of "Somewhere down the road we will be implementing some very significant game mechanic changes that will be so significant that you will essentially have a "new" character and you will have to "relearn" that character"</P> <P>Like many others have said.. Even if Vanguard is using the Archtype system, we atleast are aware of what we are getting from the START vice being told 10 months after release "You will have to "relearn" your "new" character". </P> <P>Thats my [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn]..</P> <P> </P> <P> </P><p>Message Edited by Trook on <span class=date_text>10-31-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:00 AM</span>

Starwind

10-31-2005, 09:01 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote: <P><STRONG><FONT color=#ffff00>EQ1 had a system that DID NOT work. That game had 3 classes you had to have and then a bunch that were /blah and a few that just plain did not matter. Then it had some that could do the things 3 or 4 classes could do. The term 'Holy Trinity' was coined for a reason.</FONT></STRONG></P> <P>The thing about MMOs is that everyone wants to be needed, feel heroic, etc etc. Nobody wants to be /lfg, or never picked for raids or a class that pretty much isn't needed. Combine that thought with the fact that some people really like a martial arts style, or a knight in shining armor style. Or any of the various 'styles and flavor' of the different subclasses. There is a *reason* people pick druid over cleric in this game and it doesn't always lead to ability to heal.</P> <P>If you ever read any of the other forums on this board you'll find players who explicitly state that "I picked a druid in EQ2 because I read they would be able to heal equally to clerics. I played a cleric for years in EQ1 but prefer the style of a druid. I'm glad they are finally main healers".</P> <P><STRONG><FONT color=#ffff00>See, that's the thing. People do not like being forced into a certain class to perform a certain role. It isn't any fun. People do like having options that make them a little bit different while still being necessary and useful.</FONT></STRONG></P> <P>There are a few exceptions to this though, and most notably they are playing the classes who were either the best and realigned or were the best in another game or the defacto fantasy best.</P> <P>Enter warrior, cleric, wizard, ranger.</P> <P>For whatever reason, as MrDizzi so emphatically states, people expect these four classes to be the best at their particular roles. Warriors should be the best "pure" tank, clerics should be the best "pure" healer, wizards should do the most caster damage and rangers should be the high DPS melee guys. Give or take. People assume these classes should throw everything else away to do one thing well, to be the best.</P> <P>As I've already stated in the beginning of this, EQ2 is based on an archetype system. The classes were specifically made and balanced as flavor and style around a certain job. Tanking = 6 classes can do it, all differently, all as well. Their damage/utility seperate them. Same with healing, same with caster damage, same with melee damage.</P> <P>The main problem with this system <EM>isn't</EM> that it waters the game down into just four classes. Its helping people to understand how the system was made/balanced and then have proper expectations for their class from within the system.</P> <P>Some people may flat out hate any type of archetype system. That's your right. I wouldn't go seeking solstice in Vanguard though, as you are prone to nothing but disappointment. Brad has stated many times he wasn't happy with how EQ1 classes turned out and the balancing the various classes for one role and a secondary role is "very important and something they can not fail".</P> <P>Oh, and just so you know, if we had 4 classes that were the "best" you'd only have them anyway. You wouldn't need all the fluff classes. Sure some people might roll them out of pure love for the class, but generally you'd have the 'Big Four'. It was pretty evident in EQ1 from what I hear. I realize that as a guardian you might say "but monks can FD and ...." Sorry, just as you didn't pick a guardian to be a buff bot, neither did I. Since its something neither one of us enjoy but will probably have to do now and then, we should both be capable of it and scenarios should be available that require it.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>1.) Wait, didn't you say you'd never played EQ1 in another post? You of all people should realise that you can't belive what people say about something, I'd hope. You should base your base your opinion off of your own experiences. And out of my experience with EQ1 (not very long, I was just trying it out with a real-life pal of mine who has a 70 ranger and 50-something Beastlord), the classes weren't as out of whack as you say. As a matter of fact, my pal and I did a Shadowknight/Shaman duo, and that was at his suggestion based on what he's seen being a level 70. Not to mention -everyone- liked beastlords and necro's. So what was that you were saying about the "holy trinity?"</P> <P>2.) Uh-Huh. Well, while you see a non-archetype system with a few classes that are "superior" at their main role, but inferior at other things as forcing people to play those classes to be effective; I see making every class equal, forcing people to be on an even playing field. Atleast in the former situation they have the choice, in the latter you're totally even no matter what you do. Gear is all that seperates you really. And it seems that if you just spend a week or two farming/raiding/crafting, you can be in full T6 Fabled/Legendary gear... So in EQ2's case, even the damned gear is the same.</P>

Gaige

10-31-2005, 09:57 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Starwind87 wrote:<BR> <P>I see making every class equal, forcing people to be on an even playing field. Atleast in the former situation they have the choice, in the latter you're totally even no matter what you do. Gear is all that seperates you really. And it seems that if you just spend a week or two farming/raiding/crafting, you can be in full T6 Fabled/Legendary gear... So in EQ2's case, even the damned gear is the same.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>The archetype system isn't for everyone. The only thing that really *needs* to be the same in this system is the archetypes ability to perform the primary role. /shrug<BR>

RafaelSmith

10-31-2005, 10:38 PM

<span><blockquote><hr>Gaige wrote:<div></div> <blockquote> <hr> Starwind87 wrote: <div></div> <p>I see making every class equal, forcing people to be on an even playing field. Atleast in the former situation they have the choice, in the latter you're totally even no matter what you do. Gear is all that seperates you really. And it seems that if you just spend a week or two farming/raiding/crafting, you can be in full T6 Fabled/Legendary gear... So in EQ2's case, even the damned gear is the same.</p> <hr> </blockquote>The archetype system isn't for everyone. The only thing that really *needs* to be the same in this system is the archetypes ability to perform the primary role. /shrug <div></div><hr></blockquote> Thats a rather selfish statement...If the only thing that needs to remain the same is ability to perform primary role then that puts you (i.e Brawler) ahead of the curve since you get to have equal tanking and superior "everything else". Equal means equal...equal tanking (which we now have)...equal DPS (which we dont have)...equal Utility (which we dont have)... So the fighter archetype is about 33% balanced. What ever happend to "flavor" being the only thing that made us different? Did that just disappear once you got your cake and was able to eat it also? </span><div></div>

Raahl

10-31-2005, 11:31 PM

<DIV>I've always preferred a classless system. Less worry about balancing.</DIV>

Cisgo

10-31-2005, 11:48 PM

Cisgo

10-31-2005, 11:48 PM

Cisgo

10-31-2005, 11:58 PM

<P>How does one post so strongly on a game (EQ1) that they admitted to never playing?</P> <P>How does one post so strongly on a game (Vanguard) just entering Beta?</P> <P>How does one post numerious opinions (over 7000) on things and never show one parsed data?</P> <P>As a monk from EQ1 Beta as well as EQ2 Beta monk, I will come to these boards from time to time to get a feel for the game. All I ever see is this "expert monk" putting his stamp on every monk/guardian related post (and who knows what else), frankly it gets pretty annoying. Several of these posts are also very inaccurate.</P> <P>So bash Vanguard, but please stay here in EQ2 land when it hits the shelves, that decision will make Vanguard a better place.</P> <P>As for EQ2, it is a little to late in my opinion. Many changes 10 months into the game to roles, Station Exchange, lack of community, etc. ...shame actually.</P>

Greyform

11-01-2005, 12:10 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Trook wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <BR> <P>Oh PLEASE.</P> <P>EQ2 started out that way but didn't work. Sure, I will conceed they took to long to implement the changes and left some people feeling as if their class was intended to operate in its broken and overpowered state... BUT... from the very beginning and prior to release the archetype system was advertised.<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Took too long? 10 months too long.. Believe what you want gaige but the fact still remains.. LU13 was a MAJOR change in game mechanics. We are not talking a few minor tweaks here and there.. again, a MAJOR change..</P> <P>If SoE had rolled out EQ2 with the LU13 content then, I probably would not have rolled a Guard. I rolled a Guard because I wanted the best mitigation/defensive tank and the Guardian was the choice at that time. So thats what I got and I was very happy with it. 10 months later all that has changed.</P> <P>And yes the archtype system was advertised well before release.. we all knew it and that was fine.. but when I was doing the research to figure out what subclass was the best mit/def tank, nowhere in the SOE docs/websites did I see a statement to the tune of "Somewhere down the road we will be implementing some very significant game mechanic changes that will be so significant that you will essentially have a "new" character and you will have to "relearn" that character"</P> <P>Like many others have said.. Even if Vanguard is using the Archtype system, we atleast are aware of what we are getting from the START vice being told 10 months after release "You will have to "relearn" your "new" character". </P> <P>Thats my [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn]..</P> <P> </P> <P> </P> <P>Message Edited by Trook on <SPAN class=date_text>10-31-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>04:00 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I really agree with this poster. I wish I could have based my decision on what class I was going to play based on the game dynamics we have now then what they were last year.</P> <P>I would have made a different choice, on both of my characters (I play a Templar too so I was lucky and got nerfed twice)</P> <P>I also agree with those who say they do not want to start over in EQ2 and would rather start over with everyone else in a new game. </P> <P>So I guess I will be faced with a pretty tough choice soon. I really like the guild I am in. I really do not like either of my characters. I still play them (even though it says I am retired <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> I just could not resist).</P> <P>Greyform and Greydoc both played EQ1 I guess they can both play a new game too. Even though I see Brad said he was going to make 2boxing pretty hard I am sort of looking forward to that challenge.<BR></P>

Ironmeow

11-01-2005, 02:49 AM

<DIV>if you seriously think about this game, there really isnt anything wrong when you look at it in writing, guardians get lots of taunt and defense spells and buffs and protect spells, monks get strong dps and good tanking ability and good avoidence.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The game seems fine but i think there is something wrong with the numbers in the game, for some reason 3k mitigation doesnt do much and 60% avoidence doesnt do much or does too much. And lots of raid mobs are impossible with any tank, maybe we need some sort of special resist armor that isnt even implimented in the game yet. All in all some balance issues seem to be missing from the game, it is severely imabalanced in both mathimatics and difficulty and would probably take 10 years to fix. would be faster to start with a clean slate, which im guessing was the call for the CU, but that just seemed to mess things up even more.</DIV>

a6eaq

11-01-2005, 03:40 AM

<P>Spark wrote:</P> <DIV>The Mongolians used to use Leather armour against ranged archery attacks, when the metal tip of the arrow pierced into the body, they could pull the arrow out without wripping any internal organs etc, and carry on fighting. European "plate tanks" so to speak, would die against ranged archery.</DIV> <DIV> <HR> </DIV> <P>Actually, the Mongolians wore Silk under the leather. The silk is what allowed the arrows to be removed from the body without causing additional damage. It is very hard to pierce and super strong. The Europeans wore a lot of leather if they were not Knights or paid soldiers. Without the silk, arrows were very potent weapons and since the Mongols were excellent horsemen and archers, add in that the silk made arrow wounds more surviveable and that is why the Europeans feared them and thought that they were deamons and such.</P> <P>But the intent of your arguement is valid.</P>

Gaige

11-01-2005, 03:48 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Cisgo wrote:<BR> <P>So bash Vanguard, but please stay here in EQ2 land when it hits the shelves, that decision will make Vanguard a better place.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I'm not bashing it, I'm being honest.</P> <P>I'm following the game. I read/post on their forums. What makes you think I'm not in their beta?<BR></P>

TanRaistlyn

11-01-2005, 04:06 AM

<P>I have read nothing from the multitude of posts that says Vanguard is going to a Archtype system similar to EQ2. At least not from anyone that is working on the game itself.</P> <P>People are reading the FAQ section of the boards and interpretting what it says there to fit their veiws atm. Because they list 4 "defensive" classes together and say that all of them will be able to fill their roles, doesnt mean it will come out like eq2. And I can guarentee that with this massive LU13 dissaster that Vanguard will learn from SOE's mistakes and not implement it that way.</P> <P>The truth there is not even all mighty Gaige knows how Vanguard will handle its classes upon release, and he is just spouting off what HE THINKS they are going to do with the game.</P> <P>Covenant</P>

Gaige

11-01-2005, 04:14 AM

<P>Yeah, you're right I have no idea what I'm talking about, as usual.</P> <P><A href="http://www.vanguardsoh.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=23454&highlight=tanking" target=_blank>http://www.vanguardsoh.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=23454&highlight=tanking</A></P> <P></P> <HR> Well said.<BR><BR>There are two imperatives:<BR><BR>1. That in those core roles that are necessary in interdepenent gameplay, that each class meets those roles as well as the others in the majority of situations. If this does not occur, then there will be classes that are demonstrably less desirable than others.<BR><BR>2. That the way each class fulfills their role relative to their job truly feels and plays differently. If this does not occur, then the different classes will ultimately feel the same and the differences just fluff.<BR><BR>That's our challenge and our goal. We have to pull it off. <P></P> <DIV>__________________<BR><A href="http://www.sigilgames.com/000003.php" target=_blank><FONT color=#ffba00>Brad McQuaid</FONT></A><BR>CEO, <A href="http://www.sigilgames.com/" target=_blank><FONT color=#ffba00>Sigil Games Online, Inc.</FONT></A><BR>Exec. Producer, <A href="http://www.vanguardsoh.com/" target=_blank><FONT color=#ffba00>Vanguard: Saga of Heroes</FONT></A><A href="http://www.gucomics.com/archives/view.php?cdate=20050620" target=_blank><FONT color=#ffba00>.</FONT></A> <HR> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Yup. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><A href="http://www.vanguardsoh.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=14035&highlight=branching" target=_blank>http://www.vanguardsoh.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=14035&highlight=branching</A></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> <HR> I really should do an official thread, but I don't really have the time atm.<BR><BR>Classes in Vangaurd are based around the idea of Jobs. There are 4 main jobs:<BR>Protective Fighter - Tank<BR>Offensive Fighter - Melee DPS<BR>Healer - Healing<BR>Arcane Caster - DPS, some buffing<BR><BR>All of our classes fill a role in the Job system. Each member of a job (e.g., Rogue and Ranger are both offensive Fighters) fulfills thier primary job with the same proficiency as any other member of the same job. Since the Protective Fighter's primary job is tanking, all classes that fall into this category tank with more or less the same proficiency. There may be times when the Warrior tanks better than another protective fighter, but as a general rule, in most cases, if you need a tank for your group any of the protective fighters can fill the role.<BR><BR>The next part is <U>very</U> important to understand. I mentioned primary job in the previous paragraph. This is important to note, because while each class must perform his primary job with the same skill as any other member of his job, the secondary roles of the class can and will vary wildly. This allows us a lot of options when making the classes.<BR><BR>The job system does some wonderful things for group creation. No more looking for that one class that you MUST in order to accomplish your plans. Need an offensive fighter? Grab one. Each one will not only perform his role as damage dealer, but he will also bring his own unique factor to the group's synergistic combat dynamic.<BR><BR>Homogenous classes is an easy pitfall to land in, especially when we are trying to avoid the "best class" scenario. Rest assured that we see the pitfall and we are giving it a wide breadth. The job system is pretty transparent. To use the Rogue and the Ranger as examples: They play so differently that you forget that they are filling the same role.<BR><BR>To answer the other questions -<BR><BR>Classes - Choose your class when you begin the game. No <SPAN class=highlight><STRONG><FONT color=#ff0000>branching</FONT></STRONG></SPAN>, no subclasses.<BR><BR>Skills - Each class gets many skills pools and a large amount of points to invest in those pools. As you level skill caps raise and you are given more points to invest, but not enough to max everything. So choose the type of Ranger you want to be by allocating skill points into the pools that will make you the class you want to be.<BR><BR>At some point in the future I will post a more official thread.<BR><BR>Hope that helps. <P></P> <DIV>__________________<BR>Darrin Mcpherson<BR>Game Designer<BR>Sigil Online Games<BR> <HR> </DIV></DIV> <P>Do you want more or are you ready to shut up and apologize now?</P> <P>What you *really* need to do is understand I'm watching Vanguard <EM>very</EM> closely. I probably know more about it than a lot of you guys. Not bragging, truth. The posts here make that pretty clear.</P> <P>If you read what Brad and Co are stating about the class system and read what was stated about EQ2s you'll see they are almost entirely the same thing. Go figure huh.</P> <P>The only difference is their scout class are called offensive fighters.</P><p>Message Edited by Gaige on <span class=date_text>10-31-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:17 PM</span>

TanRaistlyn

11-01-2005, 04:32 AM

<P>I read through first link and I dont see anyone from Vanguard's Dev team posting anything. And I see multiple posts of people saying that there will not be an Archtype system with branching subclasses like EQ2. To me if there is no subclasses there is no Archtype....which isnt like EQ2 at all. Seems like in Vanguard you pick a class from level 1 and you play it out, and some classes have interchangable roles with others...again not like EQ2.</P> <P> </P> <P>Covenant</P><p>Message Edited by TanRaistlyn on <span class=date_text>10-31-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:34 PM</span>

Gaige

11-01-2005, 05:52 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> TanRaistlyn wrote:<BR> <P>I read through first link and I dont see anyone from Vanguard's Dev team posting anything. And I see multiple posts of people saying that there will not be an Archtype system with branching subclasses like EQ2. To me if there is no subclasses there is no Archtype....which isnt like EQ2 at all. Seems like in Vanguard you pick a class from level 1 and you play it out, and some classes have interchangable roles with others...again not like EQ2.</P> <P>Covenant</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>LoL, sure sure.</P> <P>Click the first link, scroll down to the 13th poster (his name is Aradune Mithara - aka Brad McQuaid) and you'll see his post which I quoted in mine.</P> <P>Same with the second thread, except its a different Sigil developer posting.</P> <P>There isn't subclasses, you're correct, but its still an archetype system.</P> <P>READ what I posted, sheesh.</P> <P><BR> </P>

Greyto

11-01-2005, 07:33 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <P>Yeah, you're right I have no idea what I'm talking about, as usual.</P> <P><A href="http://www.vanguardsoh.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=23454&highlight=tanking" target=_blank>http://www.vanguardsoh.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=23454&highlight=tanking</A></P> <P></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>LOL, well we can cut and past all we want from Vangaurds boards. that's fun stuff <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P> </P> <P> </P> <P>"I am currently undertaking hypnosis therapy to remove the words 'archetype', 'fluff', 'equal', and 'flavor' from my vocabulary <IMG alt="" src="http://www.vanguardsoh.com/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif" border=0>"</P> <P></P> <DIV>__________________<BR><A href="http://www.sigilgames.com/000003.php" target=_blank><FONT color=#ffba00>Brad McQuaid</FONT></A><BR>CEO, <A href="http://www.sigilgames.com/" target=_blank><FONT color=#ffba00>Sigil Games Online, Inc.</FONT></A><BR>Exec. Producer, <A href="http://www.vanguardsoh.com/" target=_blank><FONT color=#ffba00>Vanguard: Saga of Heroes</FONT></A><A href="http://www.gucomics.com/archives/view.php?cdate=20050620" target=_blank><FONT color=#ffba00>.</FONT></A></DIV> <DIV><A href="http://www.vanguardsoh.com/forums/report.php?postid=238583" target=_blank><FONT color=#ffba00>Report Post</FONT></A> | IP: <A href="http://www.vanguardsoh.com/forums/postings.php?do=getip&postid=238583" target=_blank><FONT color=#ffba00>Logged</FONT></A></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Ok your turn.....</DIV>

Gaige

11-01-2005, 10:25 AM

<P>Listen, I'm not gonna argue with you guys. I know how Vanguard works, I know how they are balancing it, and I've read just about everything Brad has wrote about it for months.</P> <P>/shrug</P> <P>Believe what you want. It'll just be more opportunity for me to laugh at you again when Vanguard launches and you are filling the warrior boards with your rants lol.</P>

Greyto

11-01-2005, 11:10 AM

<P><BR> </P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <P>Listen, I'm not gonna argue with you guys. I know how Vanguard works, I know how they are balancing it, and I've read just about everything Brad has wrote about it for months.</P> <P>/shrug</P> <P>Believe what you want. It'll just be more opportunity for me to laugh at you again when Vanguard launches and you are filling the warrior boards with your rants lol.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Hey I am just cutting and pasting stuff just like you <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> BTW that is a real quote I posted </P> <DIV>No need to get all huffy.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I know you know how Vangaurd works Gaige most of your guild is moving there, of course you have studied up on the game.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I could spend all day here explaining how Vanguard's secondary skill set is meant to make each class play different but still be fun AND functional if they are not in their primary roll.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But what the hell good does that do me if I wanted to play this game?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Do you think my secondary roll here is any fun at all? What the heck have I been posting for two freaking months?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Maybe if you spent less time derailing threads and more time reading them your panties would not be all knotted up your you know what...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

Raahl

11-01-2005, 11:27 PM

<P>Wiou had a very good post in another thread. I believe it's a very refreshing viewpoint from a Brawler.</P> <P> </P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr> <P></P> <HR> <P></P> <P>Wiou Wrote:</P> <P></P><IMG height=1 alt="" src="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/i/p.gif" width=1 border=0> <P>I dont believe should have the same tank power or even really close to that of guardians..<BR>I am also a strong believer of only guardians being the main raid tank..<BR>I dont know if you disagree with this or not but ..<BR>I just came back and dont know how bad the guardian nerf was, but it seems pretty bad.<BR>But keep in mind that the Guardian is an extremely important class and mess ups wont be taken for granted.<BR>If something is terrible wrong like there seems to be, sony will re evaluate it...</P> <P></P> <HR> <P></P></BLOCKQUOTE>

JNewby

11-20-2005, 11:44 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <P>Yeah, luckily for you Vanguard currently only has 4 tank classes, which can all tank equally well. LoL. They are using the same system EQ2 is. Of course I'm sure you don't want to hear that.</P> <P>Monks are uber in Vanguard anyway.</P> <P> </P> <P></P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>that is fine... but they dont socker u in with a toon then take away his usefgulness... that is bad</P> <P> </P>

Shakir10

11-21-2005, 07:29 PM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <P>Listen, I'm not gonna argue with you guys. </P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Doesn't someone already have that quote from you Gaige? You need a new one <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Anyway, Have you guys read about D&D online also? What do you guys think about the idea of being able to multi class?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>It just seems to me like a big problem in this game atm is diversity. The same general argument is made over and over. We all feel the same.</DIV> <DIV><BR>Another probem I see is that it seems like all fighters are being tuned atm to just 1 role, that of the main tank. Just 1 role for 6 classes is pretty lame. There is only 1 main tank in a group and only 1 at most raids. A lot of people, not just guardians, want some way to be more diverse.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>eh.. hopefully the devs are thinking up something neet for the different fighter classes, it seems like they all need something a little more unique for when they are not the main tank.</DIV>

Benfyn

11-22-2005, 10:50 PM

<P>So Vanguard has an Offensive fighter (melee DPS) & a Protective fighter (Tank)? Now that's a cool idea. I wonder what would happen if a year after launch they made the offensive fighter as effective as the protective fighter when it came to being the tank. :smileytongue:</P> <P> </P> <P>Krrrath, lvl 60 Guardian of Kithicor<BR></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gaige wrote:<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> <HR> I really should do an official thread, but I don't really have the time atm.<BR><BR>Classes in Vangaurd are based around the idea of Jobs. There are 4 main jobs:<BR>Protective Fighter - Tank<BR>Offensive Fighter - Melee DPS<BR>Healer - Healing<BR>Arcane Caster - DPS, some buffing<BR><BR>All of our classes fill a role in the Job system. Each member of a job (e.g., Rogue and Ranger are both offensive Fighters) fulfills thier primary job with the same proficiency as any other member of the same job. Since the Protective Fighter's primary job is tanking, all classes that fall into this category tank with more or less the same proficiency. There may be times when the Warrior tanks better than another protective fighter, but as a general rule, in most cases, if you need a tank for your group any of the protective fighters can fill the role.<BR><BR>The next part is <U>very</U> important to understand. I mentioned primary job in the previous paragraph. This is important to note, because while each class must perform his primary job with the same skill as any other member of his job, the secondary roles of the class can and will vary wildly. This allows us a lot of options when making the classes.<BR><BR>The job system does some wonderful things for group creation. No more looking for that one class that you MUST in order to accomplish your plans. Need an offensive fighter? Grab one. Each one will not only perform his role as damage dealer, but he will also bring his own unique factor to the group's synergistic combat dynamic.<BR><BR>Homogenous classes is an easy pitfall to land in, especially when we are trying to avoid the "best class" scenario. Rest assured that we see the pitfall and we are giving it a wide breadth. The job system is pretty transparent. To use the Rogue and the Ranger as examples: They play so differently that you forget that they are filling the same role.<BR><BR>To answer the other questions -<BR><BR>Classes - Choose your class when you begin the game. No <SPAN class=highlight><STRONG><FONT color=#ff0000>branching</FONT></STRONG></SPAN>, no subclasses.<BR><BR>Skills - Each class gets many skills pools and a large amount of points to invest in those pools. As you level skill caps raise and you are given more points to invest, but not enough to max everything. So choose the type of Ranger you want to be by allocating skill points into the pools that will make you the class you want to be.<BR><BR>At some point in the future I will post a more official thread.<BR><BR>Hope that helps. <P></P> <DIV>__________________<BR>Darrin Mcpherson<BR>Game Designer<BR>Sigil Online Games<BR> <HR> </DIV></DIV> <P>Message Edited by Gaige on <SPAN class=date_text>10-31-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>03:17 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR> </P>

JNewby

11-23-2005, 10:53 AM

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gungo wrote:<BR> haha some of these guards posts are funny. No matter how many direct qoutes or facts they get they come crying with the same stuff the next day or they just attack the poster's character. Fact all fighters are meant to tank equal in eq2. Fact although i didn't know about it until now there are 4 Equal tanks in vanguard. My guess is alot of guards here will role warriors up in vanguard and cry again when paladins, deathknights. and inquisitors are just as good tanks there and get spells. <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><BR>"They don't seem to realize that right now they can be a warrior in WoW and the best and only tank AND have awesome dps."</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Best advice is right there WoW has 1 real tank if thats the game you want. its alot simpler and less complicated and should fit your playstyles better.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <P>Message Edited by Gungo on <SPAN class=date_text>10-28-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>07:20 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Fact u are using post live 13 lingo... Fact pre live 13 guard were said to be the most defensive... Fact u want best of both worlds</P> <P> </P>