PDA

View Full Version : There will NEVER be class balance until..


Ocello
10-16-2008, 06:01 PM
...the devs make some dirge and chanter buffs raidwide.  Never.  Period.  Needing 6 of these classes ultimately ruins the game for a lot of players, especially raiders.Fix this or admit that you do not care about class balance.That is all.

Soulforged
10-16-2008, 06:14 PM
I lol'd.Why just dirge? what's wrong with troubies?PS: There will never be class balance. And that's not really a bad thing. All that is needed is each class to have some desirability in some situations. Class balance is just a very boring concept.

Iseabeil
10-16-2008, 06:25 PM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote>I lol'd.Why just dirge? what's wrong with troubies?PS: There will never be class balance. And that's not really a bad thing. All that is needed is each class to have some desirability in some situations. Class balance is just a very boring concept.</blockquote>Was just about to say.. Its rare we only have one troub in raid, and I whimper inside at such times <img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/c30b4198e0907b23b8246bdd52aa1c3c.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />

interstellarmatter
10-16-2008, 06:30 PM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote>Fix this or admit that you do not care about class balance.</blockquote><p>Nice little ultimatum there.</p><p>Before you start holding your breath, why don't you wait until the release of the expansion and some of the new class balancing stuff that comes with the new AAs?</p>

Yimway
10-16-2008, 06:34 PM
<cite>interstellarmatter wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><p>Nice little ultimatum there.</p><p>Before you start holding your breath, why don't you wait until the release of the expansion and some of the new class balancing stuff that comes with the new AAs?</p></blockquote>I'm not exactly sold any of them (based upon leaked information) will eliminate the desire for 4-6 bards in your raid force.As far as raiding with only one troub?   Try raiding 80% of the time with no  troub, sucks hard.  Or running boxed troubs over real players of alternate classes.  Sucks.I agree with the intent of the OP, Utility classes are taking up too many raid slots, and making the buffs raid wide would take us down from running as many as 9 slots of chanters and bards, down to 4, leaving room for more classes / people.I'd be thrilled.  We've been actively recruiting bards for 3 years, and have not ever managed to have enough of them.

Thunndar316
10-16-2008, 07:11 PM
<p>You can't balance 24 different classes.  It's silly to have that many in the first place.  Do we really need a good and evil version of each class?  Nope.  </p><p>Rogue, Ranger, Shaman, Druid, Wizard, Enchanter, Mage, Necro, Cleric, Warrior, Pally, SK, Monk would have worked just fine.  That's one of the biggest rpoblems in EQ2.  They make everything so darned complicated.  Mitigation this and avoidance that.  What happened to just plain old AC?</p>

Jovie
10-16-2008, 07:30 PM
<p>eq1 raiding > eq2 raiding. Bunches of people show up, toss them in a group with a healer and go to town.</p><p>I'll never ever ever udnerstand the mindset of the minmax crowd. Y'all turn games into jobs.</p>

Thunndar316
10-16-2008, 07:32 PM
<p>Yeah and EQ1 had more strategy like slows and snares. Complete Heal and Turgurs were the most powerful spells in the game but they made it more simple.</p>

GangleG
10-16-2008, 07:37 PM
Do you understand how over powered a raid would be with raid wide chanter and bard buffs?  They would have to either nerf those classes, or nerf everyone.

Oh
10-16-2008, 07:39 PM
<cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>What happened to just plain old AC?</p></blockquote>He was camped to death in Southern Ro.. Every time he'd show his head, 50 rangers and druids would be on him faster then opra is on a box of twinkies!!

Oh
10-16-2008, 07:42 PM
<cite>GangleG wrote:</cite><blockquote>Do you understand how over powered a raid would be with raid wide chanter and bard buffs?  They would have to either nerf those classes, or nerf everyone.</blockquote>Ok I'll bite.. How is it any different to have 1 enchanter and 1 bard that have thier effects work for the whole raid versus having 4 enchanters and 4 bards? In both cases you are still getting the "group" buffs, the only main difference is that you now free'd up 6 slots for potientially other classes.

bryldan
10-16-2008, 07:43 PM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>interstellarmatter wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><p>Nice little ultimatum there.</p><p>Before you start holding your breath, why don't you wait until the release of the expansion and some of the new class balancing stuff that comes with the new AAs?</p></blockquote>I'm not exactly sold any of them (based upon leaked information) will eliminate the desire for 4-6 bards in your raid force.As far as raiding with only one troub? Try raiding 80% of the time with no troub, sucks hard. Or running boxed troubs over real players of alternate classes. Sucks.I agree with the intent of the OP, Utility classes are taking up too many raid slots, and making the buffs raid wide would take us down from running as many as 9 slots of chanters and bards, down to 4, leaving room for more classes / people.I'd be thrilled. We've been actively recruiting bards for 3 years, and have not ever managed to have enough of them.</blockquote>Ok so instead of having 9 bards/chanters you would have 4 bards/enchaters and 4 assassins and 4 brigs so what do you do then? Nerf them? Well we know for sure assassins will never get nerfed for obvious reason but lets say they do another class or two will just take there spot in line. You phylosphy (sp?) is completely wrong and will never work. I know what you are trying to do but let me tell you this IT WONT WORK THE WAY YOU THINK IT WILL. This is no different from the last game I played daoc. There would be a class that would be a must have in EVERY group for a certain realm they would nerf that class and another one would just take it place being in every group. It is a never ending cycle that just more pisses ppl off than anything. There is NO true balance because balance is percieved different by EVERYBODY.

Lasai
10-16-2008, 08:17 PM
Balance where?  PVE?  Its a big game, and too big to supposedly "balance" every class to the current FOTY raid makeup... which can change overnight depending on the whims of the people that form raids.You cannot fiddle with the entire game due to the likes/dislikes of the mix/max crowd.So yah. There will never be class balance as long as player preferences determine raid makeup.

Soluss2
10-16-2008, 08:32 PM
Ok so say you make dirge and troubie buffs raid wide... would that not lead to the same effect that tanks go through?  You would then see less need for those classes and it would be just like tank classes...guilds only wanting 1 maby 2

Laeal
10-16-2008, 09:18 PM
<p>"There will NEVER be class balance..." Should have just stopped there.  24 classes, hundreds of thousands of players, the chances of balance being attained in the opinion of even a majority are slim-to-none.</p><p>Edit: Sometimes spelling owns me...</p>

Oh
10-16-2008, 09:30 PM
<cite>Soluss2 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Ok so say you make dirge and troubie buffs raid wide... would that not lead to the same effect that tanks go through?  You would then see less need for those classes and it would be just like tank classes...guilds only wanting 1 maby 2</blockquote><p>Just pointing out there are only 2 types of bards versus 6 types of fighters. Interesting thou that bards can take up to 4+ slots in a raid but fighters only get 2. IF (not saying it would happen or heck even be a good idea) bard buffs were raid wide you would go to 2 spots for bards potientially leaving more room for other classes.</p><p>Although I think the original issue with anysort of balance stems from the more basic point of raid size vs class size. Currently you have 24 classes and 24 raid spots hense it is ripe for alot of frustration amoung the players. EQ1 had alot less classes and originailly had 72 raid spots, you never heard the arguement about my class isn't present on a raid. I could even say similar stories with WoW's raiding you have 25 raid spots and like 8ish classes which ensured you had the potiential for atleast 1 of each class. (I am not going into the whole talent tree arguement considering one could easly respec their talents just like you can respec your ap's today but you can't just change a class at a drop of a hat)</p><p>So perfect balance, nope not really going to happen. Everything in this game heck anygame out there has pro's and con's. SoE tryes really hard to ensure that there are choices and then ramifications for that choice. If raiding is your desire then you need to make that a choice and choose to do what is needed to get there. Although there are plenty of raiding guilds out there that do things the NON min/max way and are fairly successful. Again it comes down to choices.</p>

Full_Metal_Mage
10-16-2008, 09:40 PM
Isn't it amusing that every time this dead-horse subject gets yet another thread, it is always, and I do mean always, started by someone who chose to play a solo-centric class and then wants to whine about how solo-unfriendly classes are wanted for raiding?Oh, how our public education system has failed us.

Amphibia
10-17-2008, 01:16 AM
Not that I've raided in a while or ever played a bard....but bards, especially dirges, aren't exactly the hottest solo class out there? So they get raid and group desirability instead. Cool with me. /shrugs

Odys
10-17-2008, 03:38 AM
Raid encounters are badly designed since a raid force does not look at all like 4 groups , the figures needed do not reflect at all the server class ratios.There is a serious lack of need for offtanks and fighters and buffers are wa over represented. I wonder if itis a purpose to enforce people to reroll.

Killerbee3000
10-17-2008, 03:58 AM
<cite>Full_Metal_Mage wrote:</cite><blockquote>Isn't it amusing that every time this dead-horse subject gets yet another thread, it is always, and I do mean always, started by someone who chose to play a solo-centric class and then wants to whine about how solo-unfriendly classes are wanted for raiding?Oh, how our public education system has failed us.</blockquote><p>Ehh? it's about freeing up spaces in raids in favor of pure dps classes because certain raid encounters are a /yawnfest and people simply want it to be over faster.</p>

Felshades
10-17-2008, 05:30 AM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote>Raid encounters are badly designed since a raid force does not look at all like 4 groups , the figures needed do not reflect at all the server class ratios.There is a serious lack of need for offtanks and fighters and buffers are wa over represented. I wonder if itis a purpose to enforce people to reroll. </blockquote>a raid is supposed to look like four groups?four tanks, healers, and 16 dps?i sense some sore monks/bruisers that they cant get a raid spot.the problem is not to be fixed by making buffs raid wide.  you'd STILL NEED THAT MANY CHANTERS AND BARDS UNLESS THEY MAKE THEIR BUFFS EITHER TRIVIAL, OR NOT TAKE CONCENTRATION.please, 1.5 concentration slots per person, for a full raid, = 36 slots.  divide by five, you got 7.2.  and thats going by what my lvl 50 illusionist has.  this means you need 7 bard/chanter classes to buff everyone.  and i bet some of you melee would go ballistic if you couldnt get haste.  or damage procs.  or deaggro.  or any of the tasty tasty bard/chanter buffs you do get. making it raid wide isnt going to do jack shiz till they give classes more concentration slots.  that is all, deal with it, reroll, or shut up please.  its a dead, old horse.

Noaani
10-17-2008, 05:48 AM
<p>This exact same conversation came up about 2 weeks ago. People that don't read the forums on a semi regular basis shouldn't be allowed to start threads.</p><p>Basically, if bard and enchanter group buffs were made raidwide, it would have very little effect on raid makup.</p><p>First of all, due to conc slots, you would still want to take 2 dirges on a raid in order to get all their offensive and defensive buffs going. Most would probably also have 2 troubadors for the same reason, even though their defensive buffs are not as good as a dirge, but they make up for that by allowing a second Jesters Cap rotation.</p><p>Enchanters have no group buffs that are really worthwhile. Their single target buffs are what they are bought to raids for. They would gain nothing from having their group buffs made raidwide at all.</p><p>Essentially, if bard and enchanter group buffs were made raidwide, if would allow main tanks to get more defensive buffs, and DPS to get more offensive buffs. In turn, this would mean either players or mobs would need to be retuned to compensate for the fact that more buffs are avalible, which would then put raids without 2 of each bard at even more of a disadvantage than they are now.</p><p>All up, its one of the stupidest ideas for class balancing I have ever heard, and I have heard a lot.</p>

Odys
10-17-2008, 07:17 AM
It has nothing to do with solo centric classes, what i see is that guilds recruits only three kind of characters:Healers, and usually they are flexible on the sub-class the shortage is big enough so that they simply need healers.Dirge troubadour Enchanters (illu, coercers) Sometimes you will see brigands mentionned. What about all the others ?We got here 6 (healers) +  4 = 10 classes what about the 16 others?do they all fall in the soloer [Removed for Content] category ? I don't know what is the solution but obviously this is a huge failure of the designers.

bryldan
10-17-2008, 07:47 AM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote>It has nothing to do with solo centric classes, what i see is that guilds recruits only three kind of characters:Healers, and usually they are flexible on the sub-class the shortage is big enough so that they simply need healers.Dirge troubadour Enchanters (illu, coercers) Sometimes you will see brigands mentionned. What about all the others ?We got here 6 (healers) + 4 = 10 classes what about the 16 others?do they all fall in the soloer [Removed for Content] category ? I don't know what is the solution but obviously this is a huge failure of the designers. </blockquote>Did you ever stop to think the reason is more because those classes are much harder to lvl up???? It was a huge pita for me to lvl my troub especially in rok.

Faenril
10-17-2008, 08:31 AM
Typically the support classes are way less solo friendly (with maybe a few exceptions). You find no raid spot for your bruiser ? Too bad for you. But when your bruiser can reach the deepest room in a dungeon in 2 minutes, and then start farming named and shinies, that does not annoy you right ? Try doing the same with a dirge ... good luck. Some classes are good at doing something/desired in one context (ie support classes in raids), while some classes are better in a different context (ie brawlers for farming / questing). If you value raiding above everything else and you find no spot roll a support class. If you value soloability more roll a solo class, but then don't cry you find no raid spot. I don't see bards posting daily here that they are not as good as class X or Y for soloing named...

Thunderthyze
10-17-2008, 08:34 AM
<cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>You can't balance 24 different classes.  It's silly to have that many in the first place.  Do we really need a good and evil version of each class?  Nope.  </p><p>Rogue, Ranger, Shaman, Druid, Wizard, Enchanter, Mage, Necro, Cleric, Warrior, Pally, SK, Monk would have worked just fine.  <b>That's one of the biggest rpoblems in EQ2.  They make everything so darned complicated</b>.  Mitigation this and avoidance that.  What happened to just plain old AC?</p></blockquote><p>Ooh yes....it's SO complicated.......LOL</p><p>They're not complications.....they're options to allow the more experienced gamer fine tune his gameplay. Admittedly most players never consider the relevent merits of mitigation over avoidance (or vice versa) but it is nice that the "complications" ARE there so that those players interested in development of their characters have those options available to them.</p>

Airien
10-17-2008, 09:04 AM
<cite>Laeal wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>"There will NEVER be class balance..." Should have just stopped there.  24 classes, hundreds of thousands of players, the chances of balance being attained in the opinion of even a majority are slim-to-none.</p><p>Edit: Sometimes spelling owns me...</p></blockquote>DING! DING! DING!We have a winner folks.There will never be class "balance" because so many players opinions differ as to what constitutes balance.The only balance there will ever be in MMO's is what the devs feel is balanced and changes made, or lack thereof, should make it pretty easy to get an overall impression on the devs opinions in regards to how they feel the game is balanced at that time.

bryldan
10-17-2008, 10:00 AM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote>Typically the support classes are way less solo friendly (with maybe a few exceptions). You find no raid spot for your bruiser ? Too bad for you. But when your bruiser can reach the deepest room in a dungeon in 2 minutes, and then start farming named and shinies, that does not annoy you right ? Try doing the same with a dirge ... good luck. Some classes are good at doing something/desired in one context (ie support classes in raids), while some classes are better in a different context (ie brawlers for farming / questing). If you value raiding above everything else and you find no spot roll a support class. If you value soloability more roll a solo class, but then don't cry you find no raid spot. I don't see bards posting daily here that they are not as good as class X or Y for soloing named...</blockquote>Ya maybe i should start complaining with my troub saying I cant get to the bottom of a dungeon in 2 mins and this needs fixed NOW or obviously SoE doesnt care about class balance!!!!!! I mean it should be within my rights to be able to do that if a brawler can! I would get laughed off the boards for that one.....

Despak
10-17-2008, 10:12 AM
<p>I need some serious balance. Tried to solo VS last night and didn't even get him to 98%, why? When 24 people can; why can't I?</p><p>I pay to win (oops, erm play) this game, I should be able to get all the loot they can on my own.80 Dirge!</p><p>As for balance, it's not too bad atm.  </p><p>The reason you see Dirges, Troubs etc needed more often; is because we are not an "I WIN" type of class.  We can't solo the game, levelling takes a bit of work, and you need to pay attention when playing.</p><p>Tanks are not needed as often because you only 2-3 in a raid these days.  Poor for the monks and bruisers I know.  Nukers and pure DPS are a dime to a dozen (I think that's the saying?), so there is normally never a need to go looking for a new one for your guild.</p>

StormCinder
10-17-2008, 10:22 AM
<cite>Laeal wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>"There will NEVER be class balance..." Should have just stopped there. 24 classes, hundreds of thousands of players, the chances of balance being attained in the opinion of even a majority are slim-to-none.</p><p>Edit: Sometimes spelling owns me...</p></blockquote>QFE

DragonMaster2385
10-17-2008, 10:37 AM
imo, there will NEVER be class balance until: they fix the fighter class. Tanks shouldn't rely on DPS to hold agro and that issue is way bigger than raid wide buffs for support classes. Sure, it would be nice for raid wide buffs, but I don't think that is "killing" the balance of the game. It would increase DPS in most cases because it would free up slots for more dps classes, but then bards are going to complain that thier desirability (for multiple bards) just got shot.

habby2
10-17-2008, 10:55 AM
<p>Until there is only 1 class, people will never think there is "balance" between the classes.  As a guardian, am I balance to monks/bruiser for soloing, no way, they can solo way better than me.  Am I balanced to them in grouping, pretty much except for a lot of peoples perceptions that they need a plate tank.  Am I balanced to them in raiding, no way, guardians are the MT of choice.  If I look at any one of those areas, I can see imbalances, but it's not one area you need to look at for class balance, it's the class in all the areas.</p><p>Using the EQ1 analogy, since everyone looks at that with rose colored glasses, take a look at the best solo classes and their desirability in a raid ...</p><p>Necro -  You can come but forget your pet at home</p><p>Mage -  You can come but forget your pet at home</p><p>Beastlord - You can come but forget your pet at home</p><p>Druid - You can come, but stay out of the real healers way</p><p>Ranger -  You can come, we need somebody to sacrifice</p><p>Crying about class balance generally comes from people wanting one of the areas that they are weak in (solo/group/raid) beefed up, but of course, they don't want the areas they are exceptionally strong in dropped in power.  </p>

Yimway
10-17-2008, 10:57 AM
<cite>Soluss2 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Ok so say you make dirge and troubie buffs raid wide... would that not lead to the same effect that tanks go through?  You would then see less need for those classes and it would be just like tank classes...guilds only wanting 1 maby 2</blockquote>Problem is, there aren't enough players playing these classes to go around as is.  There could be 3x the bards at end game than there currently are, and there still wouldn't be enough.I bet I could find 100 guild recruitment posts right now that were looking for bards, and have been looking for bards for a long, long time.

LordPazuzu
10-17-2008, 11:05 AM
<p>Bah, show me a game with balanced classes and I'll show you a game with only one class.  Seriously.</p>

Faenril
10-17-2008, 11:11 AM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Soluss2 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Ok so say you make dirge and troubie buffs raid wide... would that not lead to the same effect that tanks go through?  You would then see less need for those classes and it would be just like tank classes...guilds only wanting 1 maby 2</blockquote>Problem is, there aren't enough players playing these classes to go around as is.  There could be 3x the bards at end game than there currently are, and there still wouldn't be enough.I bet I could find 100 guild recruitment posts right now that were looking for bards, and have been looking for bards for a long, long time.</blockquote>And you know what ? The current state of grouping while leveling does not help.When you know you will be solo almost all the way to 80, do you roll a solo efficient class (rogue, predator, druid, nuker, brawler...), or a group/utility oriented class mmh ?Making the game single player mode up to level 70 really did not help in that issue.

DragonMaster2385
10-17-2008, 11:17 AM
I agree. Since soloing is pretty much madatory 1-70, any new player that rolls a support class will soon abandon the class or the game in general (from not knowing it is just the class that is difficult). So that means that the majority of support classes will be alts, which never get as much attention as mains. I have a mid 50's trouby alt and he is not the easiest to solo. I have hard times with anything 2+ levels ^ or harder. I imagine that there are abilities later on that make it a little easier, but with how hard RoK mobs hit, I can't imagine soloing T8 is easy.

Rijacki
10-17-2008, 11:31 AM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Soluss2 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Ok so say you make dirge and troubie buffs raid wide... would that not lead to the same effect that tanks go through?  You would then see less need for those classes and it would be just like tank classes...guilds only wanting 1 maby 2</blockquote>Problem is, there aren't enough players playing these classes to go around as is.  There could be 3x the bards at end game than there currently are, and there still wouldn't be enough.I bet I could find 100 guild recruitment posts right now that were looking for bards, and have been looking for bards for a long, long time.</blockquote>Part of -that- issue is that bards aren't a snap to solo, troubadors less so than dirges.  They shine in a group but unless you have grouping available, you're leveling up solo.  Even most of the solo quests in the 70-80 range are more difficult as a bard than other classes.So.. a lot of people who roll bards abandon them before they hit raiding level.I have a dirge I raided with in KoS and EoF.  Most of her leveling was solo (time zone conflict with guild seems to interfere with me most on that).  I switched to coercer shortly before RoK launched.  I haven't gone through all the RoK soloing on my dirge yet, but I did help my boyfriend's troubie through a lot of it.  When I wasn't there to help him, he was really strapped to complete stuff I did in a snap with coercer.

Killerbee3000
10-17-2008, 11:40 AM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Soluss2 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Ok so say you make dirge and troubie buffs raid wide... would that not lead to the same effect that tanks go through?  You would then see less need for those classes and it would be just like tank classes...guilds only wanting 1 maby 2</blockquote>Problem is, there aren't enough players playing these classes to go around as is.  There could be 3x the bards at end game than there currently are, and there still wouldn't be enough.I bet I could find 100 guild recruitment posts right now that were looking for bards, and have been looking for bards for a long, long time.</blockquote><p>Lets face it, there is no point in bards outside of raids, when fighting heroics there is simply no reason to have one, the same problem used to affect chanters, but since they improved the crowd control they get they are atleast not seen as detrimental anymore for all heroic content like bards.</p><p>Simply put, 1 Tank, 1 Healer, 3 pure dps, 1 chanter or 1 Tank, 2 healers and 3 pure dps is what you want in a heroics group, everything else means you will kill mobs slower.</p><p>Add on top of that bards are worse soloers than other classes, so why would anyone roll a bard? want to play a utility class? chanters are 100 times more attractive, want to do dps? real scouts or mages are far more attractive, love the rez button dirges get? roll a healer...</p>

Bozidar
10-17-2008, 12:06 PM
make Jester's Cap a raidwide buff that's until cancelled and uses no concentration slots.. <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Yimway
10-17-2008, 12:17 PM
<cite>Killerbee3000 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite></cite><p>Simply put, 1 Tank, 1 Healer, 3 pure dps, 1 chanter or 1 Tank, 2 healers and 3 pure dps is what you want in a heroics group, everything else means you will kill mobs slower.</p></blockquote>Many of us our savy enough to know:Cases when you think you need 2 healers, a dirge is often a better choice.  The added defensive buffs make the difference.Cases when you want a 3rd dps, and you have 2 caster dps alread, the troub is more net dps to the group.So, I don't think its *that* hard to get groups as a bard, the problem is no grouping is worthwhile until level 80.  I've argued against the soloification of this game for a long time for the same reasons being pointed out here.I'm part of a group of 6 people that group together on 'alt' night for 3-4 hours the same day of the week every week.  We have a set of 6 toons we only play as a group and only play together, it makes for fast, fun, efficient leveling.  Its become more of a drag though, as we've realized we have to go do solo quests as a group or we knee-cap ourselves due to aa deficiency.  There just isn't enough heroic quest arcs to justify doing one ounce of heroic content.Anyway, this time here is our group:sk, inq, coercer, illy, troub, dirge.We chose these classes for the reasons pointed here already.  Soloing them is more frustrating than other classes, but they are in insane demand at upper levels.  So we're leveling them up as a group.  And for what it's worth, that group is disgustingly effective.

Faenril
10-17-2008, 12:21 PM
<cite>Killerbee3000 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite></cite><p>Lets face it, there is no point in bards outside of raids, when fighting heroics there is simply no reason to have one, the same problem used to affect chanters, but since they improved the crowd control they get they are atleast not seen as detrimental anymore for all heroic content like bards.</p><p>Simply put, 1 Tank, 1 Healer, 3 pure dps, 1 chanter or 1 Tank, 2 healers and 3 pure dps is what you want in a heroics group, everything else means you will kill mobs slower.</p></blockquote>In such group setup I would trade 1 dps for a bard anytime. Dirge if your group is melee oriented or trouba otherwise.The bard will add to your survivability (a lot in case of dirge), while improving overall group dps more than 1 single DPSer would.Not to mention well geared/played bards can put very nice numbers.But it seems there is a tendancy to underestimate bards for heroic content those days <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Ocello
10-17-2008, 12:29 PM
PLZ don't pull out the solo/raid desirability card.  It is stupid and lazy.Enchanters are one of the best soloers on the game, point blank period.  As are wizards, rangers, and brigands.And the whole reason I started this thread is because I rolled a Berserker, and I am worried about it being fruitless to even get him to 80, because there are no raid slots left because they are owned by freaking buff bots.Ask me how much fun it is to solo with a zerker.  It sucks.  Sure I wear plate, but unless it's multiple mobs, a well-played bard can do as much DPS.  And they run faster.  And running faster = more quests done faster.  So, bards are a decent solo class, just as much as zerkers and pallies.  Where is a zerker or pally's guaranteed raid slot or three?And if you want to QQ about brawlers' FD, then go tinker...it's just as good if not better.This next expansion is gonna be focused on doing group zones more than soloing.  Hope everyone has fun finding tanks, since nobody wants to play classes that have no raid desirability.

DragonMaster2385
10-17-2008, 12:41 PM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote>PLZ don't pull out the solo/raid desirability card.  It is stupid and lazy.Enchanters are one of the best soloers on the game, point blank period.  As are wizards, rangers, and brigands.And the whole reason I started this thread is because I rolled a Berserker, and I am worried about it being fruitless to even get him to 80, because there are no raid slots left because they are owned by freaking buff bots.Ask me how much fun it is to solo with a zerker.  It sucks.  Sure I wear plate, but unless it's multiple mobs, a well-played bard can do as much DPS.  And they run faster.  And running faster = more quests done faster.  So, bards are a decent solo class, just as much as zerkers and pallies.  Where is a zerker or pally's guaranteed raid slot or three?And if you want to QQ about brawlers' FD, then go tinker...it's just as good if not better.This next expansion is gonna be focused on doing group zones more than soloing.  Hope everyone has fun finding tanks, since nobody wants to play classes that have no raid desirability.</blockquote><p>Finding tanks are not an issue at all.  The only tanks that have low raiding desirablity are bruisers, SKs, and maybe monks.  Guess what all of those classes are good at?  Soloing.  Guess what the game focuses on 1-80?  Soloing.  Those three classes may not be the best for heroic content, but they can sure as hell hold thier own and won't have any problems leading groups through dungeons.  Sorry, but tanks are very easy to come by.</p><p>Seriously, you think run speed makes bards good at soloing?  Yeah, it helps, but there is no way you can justify soloability with run speed.  The ability to solo efficiently for every good soloing class is combat oriented and has NOTHING to do with run speed.  Sure, they help with fed ex quests, but for quests that require you to kill a mob that is 3 levels highter and one up (^), you are going to have a hard time as a bard.</p>

habby2
10-17-2008, 01:04 PM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote>PLZ don't pull out the solo/raid desirability card.  It is stupid and lazy.Enchanters are one of the best soloers on the game, point blank period.  As are wizards, rangers, and brigands.And the whole reason I started this thread is because I rolled a Berserker, and I am worried about it being fruitless to even get him to 80, because there are no raid slots left because they are owned by freaking buff bots.Ask me how much fun it is to solo with a zerker.  It sucks.  Sure I wear plate, but unless it's multiple mobs, a well-played bard can do as much DPS.  And they run faster.  And running faster = more quests done faster.  So, bards are a decent solo class, just as much as zerkers and pallies.  Where is a zerker or pally's guaranteed raid slot or three?And if you want to QQ about brawlers' FD, then go tinker...it's just as good if not better.This next expansion is gonna be focused on doing group zones more than soloing.  Hope everyone has fun finding tanks, since nobody wants to play classes that have no raid desirability.</blockquote><p>Solo/raid utility IS part of class balancing.  Not bringing that into account is being short sighted.  I'm sorry that in your narrow view, bringing that up is "lazy" as it goes against what you are advocating.  You CANNOT just look at one part for balancing, you have to look at the whole.  </p><p>As for raid spots, if you don't have a spot now for almost any class, it's going to be tough to get a spot in an established raid guild.  The exception is the "buff bots" as you put it, but that's more a factor of fewer people playing these classes than the other classes than the others.  If a fighter leaves, it's fairly quick to replace him because there's a large pool available.  Same for the dps classes, one leaves, another is right there to replace him.  Lose a healer or bard or chanter and it takes longer to replace as the pool of people is much smaller. </p><p>As for the FD, learn what you're talking about before you go giving people suggestions.  Tinker FD items have a 1 hour recast on them, not quite the same as the brawlers FD.</p>

Rahatmattata
10-17-2008, 01:09 PM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote>...the devs make some dirge and chanter buffs raidwide. Never. Period. Needing 6 of these classes ultimately ruins the game for a lot of players, especially raiders.Fix this or admit that you do not care about class balance.That is all.</blockquote>So, what buffs exactly should be raid wide? Passive mana regen? OK...Raid-wide Channel? Illusory Arm? Time Compression? Coercive Healing? Dynamism?4 enchanters are brought for their single target buffs. You can make their group buffs raid wide if you like... hell make them gamewide so everyone on the server gets hit with the buffs.... you will still see 4 chanties in an optimal raid, unless you make the single target buffs raid wide or give enchanters 20 concentration slots.I will add though I am not opposed to eliminating the need for so many utility classes. I am in a rebuilding raiding guild and we will be [Oh no you didn't!!! - Kiara] on content we can do until we get at least some kind of shaman, and 1 more bard, and 1 more enchanter. Currently we just have a dirge and illusionist, no shaman and the lack of utility is killing us... even when we can manage to bring a shaman friend along.

Iseabeil
10-17-2008, 01:23 PM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote>PLZ don't pull out the solo/raid desirability card.  It is stupid and lazy.Enchanters are one of the best soloers on the game, point blank period.  As are wizards, rangers, and brigands.<span style="color: #ff0000;">And the whole reason I started this thread is because I rolled a Berserker, and I am worried about it being fruitless to even get him to 80, because there are no raid slots left because they are owned by freaking buff bots.</span><span style="color: #99cc00;">Ask me how much fun it is to solo with a zerker.  It sucks.  Sure I wear plate, but unless it's multiple mobs, a well-played bard can do as much DPS.  And they run faster.  And running faster = more quests done faster.  So, bards are a decent solo class, just as much as zerkers and pallies.  Where is a zerker or pally's guaranteed raid slot or three?</span><span style="color: #33cccc;">And if you want to QQ about brawlers' FD, then go tinker...it's just as good if not better.</span>This next expansion is gonna be focused on doing group zones more than soloing.  Hope everyone has fun finding tanks, since nobody wants to play classes that have no raid desirability.</blockquote><p><span style="color: #ff0000;">Buffbot.. you have any idea how much a chanter has to cast to be competetive? Stop chaincasting even for a moment and dps goes on vacation. Yep, I feel like a true buffbot when playing my illu. Add to that the fact that many raid guilds do run with zerkers fairly often, you want zerkers to occupy several raid spots like those horrible 'buffbot' classes? Sounds more like a shift in FotM classes then balance to me.</span></p><p><span style="color: #99cc00;">Ive played zerk and troub. Zerker might not been the most fun to solo but compared to the troub it was a joy. As for speed. Anyone can use mounts, and if you cant use a mount for whatever reason there are still totems and crafter earring.</span></p><p><span style="color: #33cccc;">I have two maxed tinkerers. Please tell me wich recipe gives FD items that you can recast at once if you get 'You have fallen to the ground'?</span></p>

DragonMaster2385
10-17-2008, 01:49 PM
<cite>Rahatmattata wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite></cite>So, what buffs exactly should be raid wide? Passive mana regen? OK...Raid-wide Channel? Illusory Arm? Time Compression? Coercive Healing? Dynamism?4 enchanters are brought for their single target buffs. You can make their group buffs raid wide if you like... hell make them gamewide so everyone on the server gets hit with the buffs.... you will still see 4 chanties in an optimal raid, unless you make the single target buffs raid wide or give enchanters 20 concentration slots.I will add though I am not opposed to eliminating the need for so many utility classes. I am in a rebuilding raiding guild and we will be [Oh no you didn't!!! - Kiara] on content we can do until we get at least some kind of shaman, and 1 more bard, and 1 more enchanter. Currently we just have a dirge and illusionist, no shaman and the lack of utility is killing us... even when we can manage to bring a shaman friend along.</blockquote>hmm, not only is that term not appropriate for these forums, but it was totaly used out of context.  It's like listening to little kids use swear words out of context; it's amusing to laugh at, but they can't be taken seriously.[Edited out the naughty word... In the future, report it instead of highlighting it to draw even MORE attention to it, thanks!!  -- Kiara]

Fernia
10-17-2008, 02:50 PM
I dont see why classes should be balanced at all. If you want easy mode play class A. If you want a moderate challenge try B. If you really want to tough it try C...I play DDO a lot where classes are completely unbalanced and to be honest it doesnt really matter too much.

CrazyMoogle
10-17-2008, 03:13 PM
<cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>You can't balance 24 different classes.  It's silly to have that many in the first place.  Do we really need a good and evil version of each class?  Nope.  </p><p>Rogue, Ranger, Shaman, Druid, Wizard, Enchanter, Mage, Necro, Cleric, Warrior, Pally, SK, Monk would have worked just fine.  That's one of the biggest rpoblems in EQ2.  They make everything so darned complicated.  Mitigation this and avoidance that.  What happened to just plain old AC?</p></blockquote>I can't believe I'm saying this, but I agree with you completely.  The 24 pseudo-class design was such a horrid decision.

CrazyMoogle
10-17-2008, 03:27 PM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Using the EQ1 analogy, since everyone looks at that with rose colored glasses, take a look at the best solo classes and their desirability in a raid ...</p><p>Necro -  You can come but forget your pet at home</p><p>Mage -  You can come but forget your pet at home</p><p>Beastlord - You can come but forget your pet at home</p><p>Druid - You can come, but stay out of the real healers way</p><p>Ranger -  You can come, we need somebody to sacrifice</p></blockquote>I don't know about EQ1 right now as I stopped playing after GoD, but back when I played every single statement you made here was completely untrue.  Like massively not even close to true.

Thunndar316
10-17-2008, 04:32 PM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>You can't balance 24 different classes.  It's silly to have that many in the first place.  Do we really need a good and evil version of each class?  Nope.  </p><p>Rogue, Ranger, Shaman, Druid, Wizard, Enchanter, Mage, Necro, Cleric, Warrior, Pally, SK, Monk would have worked just fine.  <b>That's one of the biggest rpoblems in EQ2.  They make everything so darned complicated</b>.  Mitigation this and avoidance that.  What happened to just plain old AC?</p></blockquote><p>Ooh yes....it's SO complicated.......LOL</p><p>They're not complications.....they're options to allow the more experienced gamer fine tune his gameplay. Admittedly most players never consider the relevent merits of mitigation over avoidance (or vice versa) but it is nice that the "complications" ARE there so that those players interested in development of their characters have those options available to them.</p></blockquote><p>Why?  What's the point?  In EQ1 you needed two things for defense.  AC and HP.  Now it's a freakin mystery with people studying miles of parse spam trying to decide whether or not they need more mitigation or avoidance.  </p><p>It's silly.  </p>

woolf2k
10-17-2008, 04:40 PM
oh noes!LOL...sorry but I can't take the OP's remark seriously without any valid reasoning to back it up.

Ocello
10-17-2008, 04:43 PM
I use the term buffbot loosely, as I know these utility classes can do pretty great DPS.  But they aren't there for their DPS, they are there for their buffs.  I'll give you that their single target buffs are probably more powerful and giving them 100 conc slots is asenine.The biggest mistake was giving these classes the ability to DPS so much.  They were semi-balanced back in the day because they added DPS to the raid group and it made up for their own lack of DPS.  Now they can out-DPS fighters.  They add too much to a raid force, and I can't blame people for running as many as they can find.And as far as soloing and levelling a toon, any class can solo the quests.  Some are slower, some are faster.  But that shouldn't preclude any of them to be unwanted for raids.Keep flaming, I'm bored.  And as a side note, from a role-playing standpoint, WHY WOULD YOU BRING 4 BARDS TO KILL A DRAGON?????

habby2
10-17-2008, 04:44 PM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Using the EQ1 analogy, since everyone looks at that with rose colored glasses, take a look at the best solo classes and their desirability in a raid ...</p><p>Necro -  You can come but forget your pet at home</p><p>Mage -  You can come but forget your pet at home</p><p>Beastlord - You can come but forget your pet at home</p><p>Druid - You can come, but stay out of the real healers way</p><p>Ranger -  You can come, we need somebody to sacrifice</p></blockquote>I don't know about EQ1 right now as I stopped playing after GoD, but back when I played every single statement you made here was completely untrue.  Like massively not even close to true.</blockquote>I'm talking PoP and pre-PoP raiding.  During PoP, they did give the druid a mini CH to give them a bit more use.  As for the pet classes, that definitely was the case.  A lot of raid leaders would not allow pets on the raid for fear of them aggro'ing other mobs. 

Oh
10-17-2008, 04:48 PM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote>And as a side note, from a role-playing standpoint, WHY WOULD YOU BRING 4 BARDS TO KILL A DRAGON?????</blockquote>I would bring 24 bards to kill a dragon, I want to hear the songs that they sing while doing the task, and to hear the songs of the great battle being spread far and wide!! It's not like every bard has the same style of music...

Oh
10-17-2008, 04:50 PM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Using the EQ1 analogy, since everyone looks at that with rose colored glasses, take a look at the best solo classes and their desirability in a raid ...</p><p>Necro -  You can come but forget your pet at home</p><p>Mage -  You can come but forget your pet at home</p><p>Beastlord - You can come but forget your pet at home</p><p>Druid - You can come, but stay out of the real healers way</p><p>Ranger -  You can come, we need somebody to sacrifice</p></blockquote>I don't know about EQ1 right now as I stopped playing after GoD, but back when I played every single statement you made here was completely untrue.  Like massively not even close to true.</blockquote>I'm talking PoP and pre-PoP raiding.  During PoP, they did give the druid a mini CH to give them a bit more use.  As for the pet classes, that definitely was the case.  A lot of raid leaders would not allow pets on the raid for fear of them aggro'ing other mobs.  </blockquote>The pet issue was resolved later, I know I as a mage I used my pet alot. Alot of it was making sure to turn the pet's auto agro off and only attack once I told him to attack.

Mogzilla
10-17-2008, 05:02 PM
<p>Lets be honest here, the developers do not play all the classes, if they were forced to, lets be honest certain classes would be getting massive upgrades.</p><p>Summoners offer mediocre dps and very little utility due to the way itemization has worked out.  This needs fixed.</p><p>Rangers have to work much harder on dps and have zero utility compared to assassins hate tranfer.  This needs fixed</p><p>Guardians completly over shadow the other tanks in a raid context leaving the other 3 plate tanks scrambling for a OT postion. This is supposedly being fixed.</p><p>Bruisers have zero raid role, they dont do anything better that another class can not do better and the sum is not greater then the total of all their parts.  They need a better raid wide buff, theirs is a joke compared to what monks get.</p><p>Look at how overpowered assassins are, think that is coincidence that the person in charge of class balance just happens to play one as a main?  Hardly.</p><p>People are right when they say 100% class balance will never happen, but to lets all be honest here, class balance in reguards to raiding in EQ2 is about as horrible as I have seen in all the MMO's I have played.</p><p>If things dont get better in the next expansion you can bet both of my accounts will be canceled, I am not going through another year of total obscurity in the end game like I have with RoK.</p><p>Oh yeah, enchanters are the most overpowered classes in the game now, they can solo high end heroic content (named in chardok and chelisth) they are <b><u>almost required</u></b> for certain heroic zones (RE2), and highly desirable in the raid game.</p><p>Thats my 2 cents.</p>

Iseabeil
10-17-2008, 05:06 PM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote>And as a side note, from a role-playing standpoint, WHY WOULD YOU BRING 4 BARDS TO KILL A DRAGON?????</blockquote><p>The more bards, the better story. Bard 1 tells the story, pretty accurate from what actually happened. Bard 2 needs to be able to add something, so makes the dragon a tad bigger, a tad meaner, a tad more fireballs thrown and a few more near deaths for the entire party. Bard 3 doesnt want to be outdone so embellishes a bit more, as does bard 4 when its his/her turn.</p><p>So to go from a fairly mundane dragon kill to an epic dragon kill, it only takes a few more bards <img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /></p>

LardLord
10-17-2008, 05:30 PM
<p>Having twenty-four classes is pretty cool, in my opinion.  They could balance them a lot better than they have...just would probably need to hire more developers.  Sadly, it seems Sony doesn't want to throw any more money at this game, and they'd rather just keep their costs as low as possible to maximize profits.  If they're gonna try to get by with so few devs, then yeah, the game would benefit from merging sub-classes, but that might result in some people getting upset and leaving, which again affects the bottom line, which is all the people ultimately in charge care about.</p><p>And also, a bit of a tangent from what I wrote above, but encounter design has a lot more to do with how many raid spots people get than (literally speaking) "class balance" does.  And also, there's a lot more to the game than raiding.  I guess people have mentioned it already, but Bards are very weak soloers but great raiders.  Bruisers are great soloers but weak raiders.  In a perfect world, all classes would be balanced for soloing, grouping, and raiding (ie nerf Bruiser soloing and buff their raiding, so they are balanced in each type of gameplay).  That's obviously very difficult to do, though...especially when there are so few devs.</p>

Xanrn
10-17-2008, 05:35 PM
As yes I do love the Solo/Group/Raid desirability Card.Especially when people use it and then ignore people who call them on the pure [And I'll call you on bypassing the profanity filter.  Just say NO! - Kiara] of it.Say it again [use nice words! - k], Enchanters are the best soloers in game, get snapped up in an instance for group and raid content.So that whole thing is aload of horsecrap.Oh and don't give me any of that people don't need Bards for groups [Really?  You can't find a different word?  <a href="http://thesaurus.reference.com/. " target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://thesaurus.reference.com/. </a> learn it, live it, love it.  -- kiara], after healers, enchanters they are both next on the list of classes people will snap up.Also where did this made up gibberish about solo-classes and raid-classes come from, because there is no official documentation stating any such thing. If that was SOE official stance, which it isn't [use nice words! - k], you think they would mention it somewhere.

Mogzilla
10-17-2008, 06:07 PM
<cite>[email protected] Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>  And also, there's a lot more to the game than raiding.  I guess people have mentioned it already, but Bards are very weak soloers but great raiders.  Bruisers are great soloers but weak raiders.  In a perfect world, all classes would be balanced for soloing, grouping, and raiding (ie nerf Bruiser soloing and buff their raiding, so they are balanced in each type of gameplay).  That's obviously very difficult to do, though...especially when there are so few devs.</blockquote><p>I would like to dispell this myth about bruiser soloing.</p><p>Bruisers are good soloers until you hit RoK.  Before RoK I could kill green and occasionally blue ^^^ named.</p><p>Now I can not kill a single named green ^^^, the only people who can do that is mages.</p><p>For the record I have seen SK's solo the same stuff I can.  The only advantages bruiser have in the soloing game really is FD allows easier travel and you die less, but that is about it really.</p><p>Our ability to solo is a joke compared to what the mages can do and about equal to what brig, SK, swash can do.</p><p>Really our class just needs a raid buff of the same quality of what monks get, their is so much better then ours its almost kinda laughable.</p>

habby2
10-17-2008, 06:10 PM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote>removed - Kiara</blockquote><p>1)  When discussing balance, you MUST look at all aspects of the game.  As a guardian, I know that I can't solo as well as a brawler or a crusader or a zerker.  If I look at just that part, hell yes, they all need to be nerfed to solo just like I do!  All of the classes have their pluses and minuses in different aspects of the game, so ignoring the game as a whole is just a pure load.</p><p>2)  I agree with you about enchanters.  They went too far with their DPS when they went to make them viable for soloing.</p><p>3)  Bards are wanted for groups, I don't disagree, but they are very painful to solo, relatively low dps and low survivability when they're getting pounded on.</p><p>4)  You're right, there are no such things as solo-classes or raid-classes, there are just some that fit each mold better as part of their "balance" in the game.</p>

Mogzilla
10-17-2008, 06:11 PM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote>removed - kiara</blockquote>Yeah I have to laugh about the solo/group/raid card being played when I see enchaters soloing 84 ^^^ named in chardok and chelsith making hundreds a plat a week from farming masters, and then taking up 4 raid slots and almost being required for certain heroic zones (RE2 most notably.)

bryldan
10-17-2008, 06:17 PM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote>I use the term buffbot loosely, as I know these utility classes can do pretty great DPS. But they aren't there for their DPS, they are there for their buffs. I'll give you that their single target buffs are probably more powerful and giving them 100 conc slots is asenine.The biggest mistake was giving these classes the ability to DPS so much. They were semi-balanced back in the day because they added DPS to the raid group and it made up for their own lack of DPS. Now they can out-DPS fighters. They add too much to a raid force, and I can't blame people for running as many as they can find.And as far as soloing and levelling a toon, any class can solo the quests. Some are slower, some are faster. But that shouldn't preclude any of them to be unwanted for raids.Keep flaming, I'm bored. And as a side note, from a role-playing standpoint, WHY WOULD YOU BRING 4 BARDS TO KILL A DRAGON?????</blockquote>While those utility classes got better dps wise (bards) even before then 4 were still needed and it has been this way for quite a while and will continue this way

Mogzilla
10-17-2008, 06:17 PM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>2)  I agree with you about enchanters.  They went too far with their DPS when they went to make them viable for soloing.</p></blockquote><p>What? Enchanters have always been good soloers.</p><p>I remember they used to charm the ^^^ mobs outside VP that freaking nuke for 9K!!!  (That got nerfed)</p><p>The supposedly given their teir 1 ish DPS to "balance" them out for raiding (even though they still got 4 raid slots before hand /scratches head) because they didnt have any mobs to mezz.</p><p>So now we have classes with DPS just under assassins, wizards and warlocks, that have some of the best buffs in the game increasing their group mates dps tremendously, and are really the only true crowd control classes in the game.</p><p>I suppose the only thing they really need is a large heal and plate armor to balance them out, lol.</p><p>Wait they dont need plate armor cause they can stun lock mobs with enough reuse to where they can practically tank stuff anyhow lol.</p>

bryldan
10-17-2008, 06:20 PM
Mog why dont you then change your topic to CHANTERS because bards cannot solo out of a wet paper bag. That mob that chanters solo you say would crush us without breaking a sweat. We would be very hard pressed to solo a regular mob thats lvl 84 much less ^^^ and that would be dependent on our snares and such not being resisted..Heck for my mythical i had to go into POA and get something on the top floor. Mind you lvl 71 or 72 ^^^ was making me break a sweat to the point I wasnt killing them fast enough to progress thru there. Ya thats great soloing there buddy.

bryldan
10-17-2008, 06:22 PM
<cite>Mogzilla wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>2) I agree with you about enchanters. They went too far with their DPS when they went to make them viable for soloing.</p></blockquote><p>What? Enchanters have always been good soloers.</p><p>I remember they used to charm the ^^^ mobs outside VP that freaking nuke for 9K!!! (That got nerfed)</p><p>The supposedly given their teir 1 ish DPS to "balance" them out for raiding (even though they still got 4 raid slots before hand /scratches head) because they didnt have any mobs to mezz.</p><p>So now we have classes with DPS just under assassins, wizards and warlocks, that have some of the best buffs in the game increasing their group mates dps tremendously, and are really the only true crowd control classes in the game.</p><p>I suppose the only thing they really need is a large heal and plate armor to balance them out, lol.</p><p>Wait they dont need plate armor cause they can stun lock mobs with enough reuse to where they can practically tank stuff anyhow lol.</p></blockquote>And at one time troubs charm was just like that it was nerfed for a good reason that was way before not now so get over it.

Kiara
10-17-2008, 06:46 PM
We all need to get civil again real fast, if you please.This latest iteration of the balancing discussion is fine, just stop insulting people and stop bypassing the profanity filter, please.Thank you!

Mogzilla
10-17-2008, 07:30 PM
<cite>bryldan wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Mogzilla wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>2) I agree with you about enchanters. They went too far with their DPS when they went to make them viable for soloing.</p></blockquote><p>What? Enchanters have always been good soloers.</p><p>I remember they used to charm the ^^^ mobs outside VP that freaking nuke for 9K!!! (That got nerfed)</p><p>The supposedly given their teir 1 ish DPS to "balance" them out for raiding (even though they still got 4 raid slots before hand /scratches head) because they didnt have any mobs to mezz.</p><p>So now we have classes with DPS just under assassins, wizards and warlocks, that have some of the best buffs in the game increasing their group mates dps tremendously, and are really the only true crowd control classes in the game.</p><p>I suppose the only thing they really need is a large heal and plate armor to balance them out, lol.</p><p>Wait they dont need plate armor cause they can stun lock mobs with enough reuse to where they can practically tank stuff anyhow lol.</p></blockquote>And at one time troubs charm was just like that it was nerfed for a good reason that was way before not now so get over it.</blockquote>Get over what?  I am not talking about troubs, you have no point.

Iseabeil
10-17-2008, 08:44 PM
<cite>Mogzilla wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>2)  I agree with you about enchanters.  They went too far with their DPS when they went to make them viable for soloing.</p></blockquote><p>What? Enchanters have always been good soloers.</p><p>I remember they used to charm the ^^^ mobs outside VP that freaking nuke for 9K!!!  (That got nerfed)</p><p>The supposedly given their teir 1 ish DPS to "balance" them out for raiding (even though they still got 4 raid slots before hand /scratches head) because they didnt have any mobs to mezz.</p><p>So now we have classes with DPS just under assassins, wizards and warlocks, that have some of the best buffs in the game increasing their group mates dps tremendously, and are really the only true crowd control classes in the game.</p><p>I suppose the only thing they really need is a large heal and plate armor to balance them out, lol.</p><p>Wait they dont need plate armor cause they can stun lock mobs with enough reuse to where they can practically tank stuff anyhow lol.</p></blockquote><p>Always? A really big word you use there. Has VP <i>always</i> been present in eq2? Ah, didnt think so.</p><p>Did you happen to play an enchanter back in 2004 when eq2 was new? Doubtfull. I did tho, and good soloer would be among the lowest on my list of descriptions for what an enchanter was back then. Painfull and excrutiating would be more fitting words. Try stay away from words like <i>always</i>, if you dont have the proper backup for using it. Things change in mmorpgs. That is an always. What is awesome today might be as exciting as yesterdays dishwater in a while, and what everyone goes meh at now might be FotM one day. Are chanters powerfull today? yes they are, and I doubt anyone would argue that. Has they always been that powerfull and will they remain being so forever? No.</p><p>This crusade is starting to turn into a cliché tbh.</p>

Spyderbite
10-17-2008, 09:21 PM
<cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>You can't balance 24 different classes.  It's silly to have that many in the first place.  Do we really need a good and evil version of each class?  Nope.</p></blockquote>Yes. We do. On some servers anyways. This is the Combat and <b>General</b> Gameplay Discussion forum. Keep that in mind before speaking on behalf of all the play styles.

Andu
10-17-2008, 09:47 PM
You can never have balanced classes so there is little point arguing about it. You give me 24 balanced classes and I'll give you a min/maxed raid setup that excludes a quarter of them.There are only so many ways of removing health from a mob, giving health to a player, lowering the incoming damage and raising the outgoing damage. Thats the mechanics of the game in a nutshell, everything else is just fluff. If one class does one thing exactly the same as the next ... then they're just the same class with a different name. You may as well just get rid of one of them. If there is even the slightest difference between the two, then one will be better than the other.So you have the choice to play a game with next to no classes or you accept that when you mix 24 different ones together some are going to be better than others in the mix. If you want to raid seriously you will be a lot happier when you come to terms with that and go with the class that is the best instead of beating your head against a wall that no developer even in a perfect world could do anything about. That or find people that dont mind putting up with your slackness, or play your class so well that you overcome the deficiency with it so you compare reasonably with others.

Noaani
10-17-2008, 10:14 PM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>You can't balance 24 different classes.  It's silly to have that many in the first place.  Do we really need a good and evil version of each class?  Nope.</p></blockquote>Yes. We do. On some servers anyways. This is the Combat and <b>General</b> Gameplay Discussion forum. Keep that in mind before speaking on behalf of all the play styles.</blockquote><p>There is no gameplay mechanics reason to require all 24 classes in game.</p><p>Although it will not be changed, roleplaying is not a reason to justify any mechanics changes or lak thereof. You would be able to roleplay an evil pirate or a dashing swashbuckler if both rouges were combined into one class.</p><p>If you have some other 'reason' why this couldn't happen, feel free to attempt to post it, rather than just some random general rhetoric.</p>

Spyderbite
10-17-2008, 10:18 PM
<cite>Noaani wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Although it will not be changed, roleplaying is not a reason to justify any mechanics changes or lak thereof.</p></blockquote>Try PvP... if there were no Good and Evil... it would be FFA.. and that has failed in every MMO to date.I was pointing out that this isn't the PvE forum.. its the General Gameply forum. The ideas here effect all the servers.. not just yours. If General Gameplay was just about PvE, then it would be labeled as such.

Felshades
10-18-2008, 12:58 AM
<cite>Mogzilla wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>[email protected] Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>  And also, there's a lot more to the game than raiding.  I guess people have mentioned it already, but Bards are very weak soloers but great raiders.  Bruisers are great soloers but weak raiders.  In a perfect world, all classes would be balanced for soloing, grouping, and raiding (ie nerf Bruiser soloing and buff their raiding, so they are balanced in each type of gameplay).  That's obviously very difficult to do, though...especially when there are so few devs.</blockquote><p>I would like to dispell this myth about bruiser soloing.</p><p>Bruisers are good soloers until you hit RoK.  Before RoK I could kill green and occasionally blue ^^^ named.</p><p>Now I can not kill a single named green ^^^, the only people who can do that is mages.</p><p>For the record I have seen SK's solo the same stuff I can.  The only advantages bruiser have in the soloing game really is FD allows easier travel and you die less, but that is about it really.</p><p>Our ability to solo is a joke compared to what the mages can do and about equal to what brig, SK, swash can do.</p><p>Really our class just needs a raid buff of the same quality of what monks get, their is so much better then ours its almost kinda laughable.</p></blockquote>oh really?all the ones i tried to solo i got a big fat IMMUNE. to my root.

Felshades
10-18-2008, 01:00 AM
<cite>Noaani wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>You can't balance 24 different classes.  It's silly to have that many in the first place.  Do we really need a good and evil version of each class?  Nope.</p></blockquote>Yes. We do. On some servers anyways. This is the Combat and <b>General</b> Gameplay Discussion forum. Keep that in mind before speaking on behalf of all the play styles.</blockquote><p>There is no gameplay mechanics reason to require all 24 classes in game.</p><p>Although it will not be changed, roleplaying is not a reason to justify any mechanics changes or lak thereof. You would be able to roleplay an evil pirate or a dashing swashbuckler if both rouges were combined into one class.</p><p>If you have some other 'reason' why this couldn't happen, feel free to attempt to post it, rather than just some random general rhetoric.</p></blockquote>hes talking about pvp you dolt, where you couldnt have good necros for the longest time, remember?

Mogzilla
10-18-2008, 01:08 AM
<cite>Iseabeil wrote:</cite><blockquote>Always? A really big word you use there. Has VP <i>always</i> been present in eq2? Ah, didnt think so.</blockquote><p>Ok but they have been good soloers for quite some time now and they didnt even need 9k nuke mobs either, even without them they are still top dogs at soloing.  I dont know any other class that is soloing the named 84^^^ in Chelsith and Chardok except enchanters.</p>

Mogzilla
10-18-2008, 01:11 AM
<cite>Felshades wrote:</cite><blockquote>oh really?all the ones i tried to solo i got a big fat IMMUNE. to my root.</blockquote>I see mages soloing in KC all the time.

Oh
10-18-2008, 01:32 AM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Noaani wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Although it will not be changed, roleplaying is not a reason to justify any mechanics changes or lak thereof.</p></blockquote>Try PvP... if there were no Good and Evil... it would be FFA.. and that has failed in every MMO to date.<b>I was pointing out that this isn't the PvE forum</b>.. its the General Gameply forum. The ideas here effect all the servers.. not just yours. If General Gameplay was just about PvE, then it would be labeled as such.</blockquote>ACTUALLY anytime there is the mention of PvP it is shoved into the pvp forum, so by default that would make this the PvE general gameplay forum. Although I do agree that all styles of play should be looked at, but just stating what mods do in general when PvP is mentioned.

Aull
10-18-2008, 01:43 AM
<cite>Thunndar316 wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>You can't balance 24 different classes.  It's silly to have that many in the first place.  Do we really need a good and evil version of each class?  Nope.  </p><p>Rogue, Ranger, Shaman, Druid, Wizard, Enchanter, Mage, Necro, Cleric, Warrior, Pally, SK, Monk would have worked just fine.  That's one of the biggest rpoblems in EQ2.  They make everything so darned complicated.  Mitigation this and avoidance that.  What happened to just plain old AC?</p></blockquote>Agreed!! I think that in order to keep sub-class individuality then what ever one sub class abilities exsist then the other should be at the oposing end of the sectrum.

Noaani
10-19-2008, 01:25 AM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Noaani wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Although it will not be changed, roleplaying is not a reason to justify any mechanics changes or lak thereof.</p></blockquote>Try PvP... if there were no Good and Evil... it would be FFA.. and that has failed in every MMO to date.I was pointing out that this isn't the PvE forum.. its the General Gameply forum. The ideas here effect all the servers.. not just yours. If General Gameplay was just about PvE, then it would be labeled as such.</blockquote><p>How exactly do you figure that you need to have seperate classes in PvP in order to have seperate factions? last time I looked, both factions always had both sorcerers, both druids, both warriors and both bards, and then you look at how it is now... so the game is already disproving your stand here.</p><p>That makes even less sence than a roleplaying excuse.</p>