In Defense of the Beastlord

[Gortha]

I keep reading how OP BL's were in eq1 and I strongly disagree - though we dont know much about how they will work in EQ2 yet, in EQ1 they came along at a time when the game was already in decline - couldn't find a healer for your group?, get a couple BL's, cant find a tank, get a couple BL's... need some crowd control? get a couple BLs... they fit the "Jack of all trades" role quite well in that game, no one yet knows what they will be like for EQ2, but they come at a similar time in the lifespan of the game and assuming they keep their "jack of all trades" role, it makes sense to add them at this point. lets see how they play before writing them off as OP from the start. its far to early to tell yet.

I for one am very much looking forward to playing a BL again, a BL was my main in EQ1 and its been a constant wish of mine from the start of EQ2 to have them here too. to be honest, its whats keeping me subscribed at this point. I just hope they dont screw them up, it could very well be the thing that makes me finally leave the game if they fail to do it correctly.

[Valentina]

I'm looking forward to playing a BL too. However, I'm not sure your argument that 'BLs were not overpowered in EQ1 because they came at a time when it was helpful to have a class that could fill almost any role well' really works. Just because they filled a niche does not mean they were not overpowered. (Just the opposite, in fact) Obviously, SOE will try to avoid that when implementing them in EQ2, though I suspect they'll start out a bit overpowered anyway.

[Morghus]

If they end up overpowered, they will attract the wrath of

Conjurors

Necromancers

Brigands

Swashbucklers

Assassins

Rangers

Wizards

Warlocks

As, it was said they would be a dps scout class that will likely be clashing for the same spots that are currently filled by those other classes.

[Lalen]

Gorthaur wrote:

I keep reading how OP BL's were in eq1 and I strongly disagree - though we dont know much about how they will work in EQ2 yet, in EQ1 they came along at a time when the game was already in decline - couldn't find a healer for your group?, get a couple BL's, cant find a tank, get a couple BL's... need some crowd control? get a couple BLs... they fit the "Jack of all trades" role quite well in that game, no one yet knows what they will be like for EQ2, but they come at a similar time in the lifespan of the game and assuming they keep their "jack of all trades" role, it makes sense to add them at this point. lets see how they play before writing them off as OP from the start. its far to early to tell yet.

I for one am very much looking forward to playing a BL again, a BL was my main in EQ1 and its been a constant wish of mine from the start of EQ2 to have them here too. to be honest, its whats keeping me subscribed at this point. I just hope they dont screw them up, it could very well be the thing that makes me finally leave the game if they fail to do it correctly.

BWHAHAHAHAHAHA!  Who said they were OP?  Their buffs sucked troll feet, their dps couldn't even match a monk, and their heals was a one-shot-one-tick regen [Removed for Content].  I mean they just reciently had to "RECLASSIFY" and "REDEFINE" a BL as a PULLER in EQ1 by giving them FD.  Nuff said.

[p3t3rl1]

Luclin was not eq1's decline, PoP was EQ1's climax (least for raiding experience). EQ1 declined after PoP. 

[Besual]

Morghus wrote:

If they end up overpowered, they will attract the wrath of

Conjurors

Necromancers

Brigands

Swashbucklers

Assassins

Rangers

Wizards

Warlocks

As, it was said they would be a dps scout class that will likely be clashing for the same spots that are currently filled by those other classes.

You forgott SK because they won't be FOTM anymore

[wullailhuit]

in EQ1 , they were the best solo class in the game , with the best buffs they could use and highest level spells that they could get they could pretty much solo content that took 2-3 people to kill.

This was during and just after the PoP expansion , after that they may have declined (I left EQ1 about then).

I remember dueling a BL lots of times on my necro , we were both equally geared , in the same high level raid guild and the only way my pet could outlast his was if he didn't buff the pet at all.

Fingers crossed the EQ2 BL will be weaker than the classes it is due to emulate , jack of all trades but master of none so to speak.

But knowing SoE's long track record of miss and miss when trying to balance a class , I don't doubt they will be OP at the start and for a while after, so lots of people will create them until they get around to knee-jerk nerfing them to below where they should be...then they may increase their abilites a little again after that.

As usual it'll be a while before the class settles down to it's niche..(though I can't see where it's supposed to fit personally).

[Velenda]

*facepalm*

Would you guys be happy if SOE just made no changes at all? Announced nothing new?

I mean it seems like nothing makes anyone happy here.  >_<

[Tallithia]

Beastlord froglock FTW!!  hehe

[interstellarmatter]

Yay Beastlords. 

Hey, it's something different.

[Trensharo]

Wullailduo@Splitpaw wrote:

in EQ1 , they were the best solo class in the game , with the best buffs they could use and highest level spells that they could get they could pretty much solo content that took 2-3 people to kill.

Lol.  No.

People called them overpowered because they were overly flexible.  Chanters were good, but they weren't great DPS.  Shaman were excellent slowers and buffers, but they weren't Cleric or even Druid-level healing.  Bards were well below Beastlords for DPS due to their utility.  Beastlords seemed to get overly favorable treatment in their design and implementation compared to other classes.  They had literally no drawbacks that you could name, unless you were really grasping at straws or trolling to try to defend the class.

Also, SOE took tons of feedback from other class communities (esp. Mages and Necros) and used it favorably in their design of the Beastlord class.

Put it into perspective.  Beastlords were added in Shadows of Luclin.  In that Expansion, Mages were dropping dozens of Mod Rods on the ground instead of DPSing in lots of cases and No one took two Necros to a raid because they didn't stack at all - one Necros DoTs would overwrite anothers', etc. (nevermind the whole "Twitch" Subversion line spells that they were anchored to).  Mages complained about weak pet heals, not having a any CC or damage mitigation abilities (Necros could Fear, Root, and Snare; had Lifetaps/Tap DoTs, Feign Death, and Evac; Mezz, and Undead Atk Speed Slow), and their relatively weak pet buffs...

What do SOE do?  Make Beastlords.  Greats.  They got Shaman Buffs (not max level, below max the way SKs got their Necro spells), ridiculous pet heals (obviously superior to mage), a big Slow Spell (for everything), could take a decent beating, and even got some smaller heals for themselves.  They also got a Mana Regen Buff that could be made AoE (beyond "raid-wide") via Mass Group Buff.  They got other buffs like Haste, etc. that they could cast on others, as well.  They had great Synergy with pretty much all non-Shaman Buffers and having a BL in group gave the group ridiculous flexibility in group makeup - beyond what they had if they had invited a different DPS/utility class because their skillset was too varied.  They had literally no drawbacks for all of that.

And they really had no weakness as far as the game design in that era was concerned.  The fact that from PoP onwards (until they started making mobs mitigate slow spells) the game was so overly dependent on Attack Speed slows just sealed the deal for them.  Beastlords having that one spell was a huge source or complaining for a lot of other DPS classes.

It took years before the discrepencies were balanced out.  Mages didn't really good their fair shake until GoD, and Necros still had to sit through Luclin and didn't get their stackign issues fixed until PoP.  They didn't really become a top DPS class until DoT Critting was added (and they were impossible to parse before SoE added the damage messages for DoTs, and it was ONLY for the Necro - not everyone else).

Necros were always superior soloers to Beastlords due to infinite resource (Lich and Mana) and the ability to Multi-Kite strong MOBs with Fear and/or Snare (remember PoFire Tables, a PoP BST needed PoTime gear for that, a Necro could do it with Pre-Elemental gear easily and with 0 downtime unlike Quadding Wizards and Druids, Mages couldn't do it efficiently until the next expansion) with little risk.

In SoLuclin a good group was superior to soloing for grinding AAs, though.  Soloing didn't eclipse grouping until PoFire Tables and then The Nest after that.  After PoR I'm not up on how they designed the content because I quit like a week before the next Expansion came out.

[Trensharo]

By the way I doubt SOE will make the same mistakes with the EQ2 BL that they did with the EQ1 BL, which was clearly positioned to get as many people to reroll as possible.

Consequently, when they added the Berzerker class to EQ1 it was [Removed for Content] as hell, and people complained furiously about it.  They probably didn't want to uber it up like they did BLs, so they shot low and then just adjusted after release instead of the other way around.

People tend to prefer boosts to nerfs

[scruffylookin]

The Beastlord is going to bring a very old friend (my first mentor in EQ1) back to this game, at least long enough to try it out. For purely selfish reasons, that's enough for me to support its return. That said, I really hope they have a beastlord in-game named Rick Astley.

[Illmarr]

Lalen@Everfrost wrote:

Gorthaur wrote:

I keep reading how OP BL's were in eq1 and I strongly disagree - though we dont know much about how they will work in EQ2 yet, in EQ1 they came along at a time when the game was already in decline - couldn't find a healer for your group?, get a couple BL's, cant find a tank, get a couple BL's... need some crowd control? get a couple BLs... they fit the "Jack of all trades" role quite well in that game, no one yet knows what they will be like for EQ2, but they come at a similar time in the lifespan of the game and assuming they keep their "jack of all trades" role, it makes sense to add them at this point. lets see how they play before writing them off as OP from the start. its far to early to tell yet.

I for one am very much looking forward to playing a BL again, a BL was my main in EQ1 and its been a constant wish of mine from the start of EQ2 to have them here too. to be honest, its whats keeping me subscribed at this point. I just hope they dont screw them up, it could very well be the thing that makes me finally leave the game if they fail to do it correctly.

BWHAHAHAHAHAHA!  Who said they were OP?  Their buffs sucked troll feet, their dps couldn't even match a monk, and their heals was a one-shot-one-tick regen [Removed for Content].  I mean they just reciently had to "RECLASSIFY" and "REDEFINE" a BL as a PULLER in EQ1 by giving them FD.  Nuff said.

When introduced with Luclin they were the most OP class in the game. Over time, especially post GoD they lost more and more power relative to other classes due to mechanics changes and lack of ability upgrades to deal with them

[Grumble69]

The concern for me is "top tier DPS" and "utility".  I'm guessing that they're not both at the same time.  But as a brig, I'm a bit envious that they would even have the ability to be one or the other.

[Talathion]

"they're DPS will be on Par to assassins" Devs.

[Chanaluss]

Lalen@Everfrost wrote:

Gorthaur wrote:

I keep reading how OP BL's were in eq1 and I strongly disagree - though we dont know much about how they will work in EQ2 yet, in EQ1 they came along at a time when the game was already in decline - couldn't find a healer for your group?, get a couple BL's, cant find a tank, get a couple BL's... need some crowd control? get a couple BLs... they fit the "Jack of all trades" role quite well in that game, no one yet knows what they will be like for EQ2, but they come at a similar time in the lifespan of the game and assuming they keep their "jack of all trades" role, it makes sense to add them at this point. lets see how they play before writing them off as OP from the start. its far to early to tell yet.

I for one am very much looking forward to playing a BL again, a BL was my main in EQ1 and its been a constant wish of mine from the start of EQ2 to have them here too. to be honest, its whats keeping me subscribed at this point. I just hope they dont screw them up, it could very well be the thing that makes me finally leave the game if they fail to do it correctly.

BWHAHAHAHAHAHA!  Who said they were OP?  Their buffs sucked troll feet, their dps couldn't even match a monk, and their heals was a one-shot-one-tick regen [Removed for Content].  I mean they just reciently had to "RECLASSIFY" and "REDEFINE" a BL as a PULLER in EQ1 by giving them FD.  Nuff said.

wrong. using beastlord FD to pull would be suicide. it doesnt have a high enough success chance or short enough recast to be reliable for split pulling, and the beastlord class has no means to seperate groups of mobs without sending their pet in to die. Beastlords are a DPS class that can buff reliably. their new buff from the House of Thule expansion can turn Berserkers into absolute monsters, and people are calling it, yes, OP. in addition to that, their dps recieved an overhaul, their mana regeneration spells now work for both mana and endurance (melee mana), and their shaman buff is on par with an actual shaman's. they are a much more viable class than they were 15 months ago.

[Gilasil]

I am definately looking forward to playing an Iksar BL.

It's a shame really, my SK is finally on the home stretch and I"m already planning to retire it.

I am absolutely amazed people can say with a straight face that BLs will be overpowered.  Nobody knows what they'll be.  Ok, they're tier 1 DPS.  They're going to have to be good at SOMETHING.  Did you think they'd intentionally make a class which was second rate at everything (they often do it unintentionally but not intentionally)?  I'd love to have a DPS class and I hate the assassin.  In fact I hate all the scouts.  It'll be a nice change.

They biggest thing I remember about the BL in EQ1 was they were decent soloers in a game where soloing was virtually nonexistent.  At the time I was playing (pre-PoP) if you could solo at all above 30 you were doing pretty well.  I guess it got easier later but I wasn't playing then.  Obviously that won't be enough in EQ2 where everyone can solo.  I knew one guy in EQ1 who killed the same two trolls over and over again for something like 5 levels because they were about the only thing he could find which he could solo at those levels.  It's hard to believe we put up with that.

[Lalen]

Cisteros@Crushbone wrote:

Lalen@Everfrost wrote:

Gorthaur wrote:

I keep reading how OP BL's were in eq1 and I strongly disagree - though we dont know much about how they will work in EQ2 yet, in EQ1 they came along at a time when the game was already in decline - couldn't find a healer for your group?, get a couple BL's, cant find a tank, get a couple BL's... need some crowd control? get a couple BLs... they fit the "Jack of all trades" role quite well in that game, no one yet knows what they will be like for EQ2, but they come at a similar time in the lifespan of the game and assuming they keep their "jack of all trades" role, it makes sense to add them at this point. lets see how they play before writing them off as OP from the start. its far to early to tell yet.

I for one am very much looking forward to playing a BL again, a BL was my main in EQ1 and its been a constant wish of mine from the start of EQ2 to have them here too. to be honest, its whats keeping me subscribed at this point. I just hope they dont screw them up, it could very well be the thing that makes me finally leave the game if they fail to do it correctly.

BWHAHAHAHAHAHA!  Who said they were OP?  Their buffs sucked troll feet, their dps couldn't even match a monk, and their heals was a one-shot-one-tick regen [Removed for Content].  I mean they just reciently had to "RECLASSIFY" and "REDEFINE" a BL as a PULLER in EQ1 by giving them FD.  Nuff said.

When introduced with Luclin they were the most OP class in the game. Over time, especially post GoD they lost more and more power relative to other classes due to mechanics changes and lack of ability upgrades to deal with them

They were not that OP'ed.  In fact there were many classes that could hang in soloing.  Because they were one of the two hybrid class that could solo didn't make them op in fact shadowknights arguably had the edge over bl's at the time.

Charuthus@Antonia Bayle wrote:

Lalen@Everfrost wrote:

Gorthaur wrote:

I keep reading how OP BL's were in eq1 and I strongly disagree - though we dont know much about how they will work in EQ2 yet, in EQ1 they came along at a time when the game was already in decline - couldn't find a healer for your group?, get a couple BL's, cant find a tank, get a couple BL's... need some crowd control? get a couple BLs... they fit the "Jack of all trades" role quite well in that game, no one yet knows what they will be like for EQ2, but they come at a similar time in the lifespan of the game and assuming they keep their "jack of all trades" role, it makes sense to add them at this point. lets see how they play before writing them off as OP from the start. its far to early to tell yet.

I for one am very much looking forward to playing a BL again, a BL was my main in EQ1 and its been a constant wish of mine from the start of EQ2 to have them here too. to be honest, its whats keeping me subscribed at this point. I just hope they dont screw them up, it could very well be the thing that makes me finally leave the game if they fail to do it correctly.

BWHAHAHAHAHAHA!  Who said they were OP?  Their buffs sucked troll feet, their dps couldn't even match a monk, and their heals was a one-shot-one-tick regen [Removed for Content].  I mean they just reciently had to "RECLASSIFY" and "REDEFINE" a BL as a PULLER in EQ1 by giving them FD.  Nuff said.

wrong. using beastlord FD to pull would be suicide. it doesnt have a high enough success chance or short enough recast to be reliable for split pulling, and the beastlord class has no means to seperate groups of mobs without sending their pet in to die. Beastlords are a DPS class that can buff reliably. their new buff from the House of Thule expansion can turn Berserkers into absolute monsters, and people are calling it, yes, OP. in addition to that, their dps recieved an overhaul, their mana regeneration spells now work for both mana and endurance (melee mana), and their shaman buff is on par with an actual shaman's. they are a much more viable class than they were 15 months ago.

They are definately a substitute puller now (in EQ1) if that is what you're trying to disprove.  Again though BL's had a pet that was slightly less than that of a mage, and slightly better than that of a necromancer.  SK's were in the same boat but with a pet that only classified as a dot -- but you didn't see a BL trying to tank greig either.  The BL was supposed to be a leather DPS class... When INTRODUCED they couldn't even rival a mage, much less a wizard.  Which put them where they were supposed to be -- in the high end of melee dps.

[Chanaluss]

They are definately a substitute puller now (in EQ1) if that is what you're trying to disprove. 

yes, they can pull, but SKs, necromancers, rangers, bards, and monks can do it both safer and more efficiently thanks to additional means of mob control like snares, pacify, flusterbolt, mez, etc. they are hardly class "defined" as a puller.

[Trensharo]

Lalen@Everfrost wrote:

Cisteros@Crushbone wrote:

Lalen@Everfrost wrote:

Gorthaur wrote:

I keep reading how OP BL's were in eq1 and I strongly disagree - though we dont know much about how they will work in EQ2 yet, in EQ1 they came along at a time when the game was already in decline - couldn't find a healer for your group?, get a couple BL's, cant find a tank, get a couple BL's... need some crowd control? get a couple BLs... they fit the "Jack of all trades" role quite well in that game, no one yet knows what they will be like for EQ2, but they come at a similar time in the lifespan of the game and assuming they keep their "jack of all trades" role, it makes sense to add them at this point. lets see how they play before writing them off as OP from the start. its far to early to tell yet.

I for one am very much looking forward to playing a BL again, a BL was my main in EQ1 and its been a constant wish of mine from the start of EQ2 to have them here too. to be honest, its whats keeping me subscribed at this point. I just hope they dont screw them up, it could very well be the thing that makes me finally leave the game if they fail to do it correctly.

BWHAHAHAHAHAHA!  Who said they were OP?  Their buffs sucked troll feet, their dps couldn't even match a monk, and their heals was a one-shot-one-tick regen [Removed for Content].  I mean they just reciently had to "RECLASSIFY" and "REDEFINE" a BL as a PULLER in EQ1 by giving them FD.  Nuff said.

When introduced with Luclin they were the most OP class in the game. Over time, especially post GoD they lost more and more power relative to other classes due to mechanics changes and lack of ability upgrades to deal with them

They were not that OP'ed.  In fact there were many classes that could hang in soloing.  Because they were one of the two hybrid class that could solo didn't make them op in fact shadowknights arguably had the edge over bl's at the time.

Charuthus@Antonia Bayle wrote:

Lalen@Everfrost wrote:

Gorthaur wrote:

I keep reading how OP BL's were in eq1 and I strongly disagree - though we dont know much about how they will work in EQ2 yet, in EQ1 they came along at a time when the game was already in decline - couldn't find a healer for your group?, get a couple BL's, cant find a tank, get a couple BL's... need some crowd control? get a couple BLs... they fit the "Jack of all trades" role quite well in that game, no one yet knows what they will be like for EQ2, but they come at a similar time in the lifespan of the game and assuming they keep their "jack of all trades" role, it makes sense to add them at this point. lets see how they play before writing them off as OP from the start. its far to early to tell yet.

I for one am very much looking forward to playing a BL again, a BL was my main in EQ1 and its been a constant wish of mine from the start of EQ2 to have them here too. to be honest, its whats keeping me subscribed at this point. I just hope they dont screw them up, it could very well be the thing that makes me finally leave the game if they fail to do it correctly.

BWHAHAHAHAHAHA!  Who said they were OP?  Their buffs sucked troll feet, their dps couldn't even match a monk, and their heals was a one-shot-one-tick regen [Removed for Content].  I mean they just reciently had to "RECLASSIFY" and "REDEFINE" a BL as a PULLER in EQ1 by giving them FD.  Nuff said.

wrong. using beastlord FD to pull would be suicide. it doesnt have a high enough success chance or short enough recast to be reliable for split pulling, and the beastlord class has no means to seperate groups of mobs without sending their pet in to die. Beastlords are a DPS class that can buff reliably. their new buff from the House of Thule expansion can turn Berserkers into absolute monsters, and people are calling it, yes, OP. in addition to that, their dps recieved an overhaul, their mana regeneration spells now work for both mana and endurance (melee mana), and their shaman buff is on par with an actual shaman's. they are a much more viable class than they were 15 months ago.

They are definately a substitute puller now (in EQ1) if that is what you're trying to disprove.  Again though BL's had a pet that was slightly less than that of a mage, and slightly better than that of a necromancer.  SK's were in the same boat but with a pet that only classified as a dot -- but you didn't see a BL trying to tank greig either.  The BL was supposed to be a leather DPS class... When INTRODUCED they couldn't even rival a mage, much less a wizard.  Which put them where they were supposed to be -- in the high end of melee dps.

We're talking about BLs when they were put into the game in EQ1, not after 6 years of Balancing after their introduction.  An SK could not out-solo a Beastlord in Luclin or PoP.  I don't know what game you were playing back then.  The only way an SK could solo with nearly the uptime of a Beastlord was to Snare Kite, which pretty much doomed them to Slow Killspeeds even if they didn't have *too many* resource issues (they did get low Lich levels, IIRC, but their mana pools were much smaller than an INT caster's).

Beastlords got decent DPS (PC + Pet), buffs, Patch Heals for themselves and big heals for their pet.  They could just slow a MOB and run through it.  EQ1 was different than EQ2.  In EQ2 there are classes that excel at soloing, but every class can do it decently.  In EQ1 the disparity between great soloers and decent soloers and especially "meh" soloers was HUGE.

The person you replied to is right.  Beastlords didn't really fall into line until later expansions where mechanic changes worked out of their favor.  Mobs started hitting for ridiculous amounts of damage, and they started Mitigating Slow Effects.  Other classes got more (or updated) utility and things started to balance out.

In Luclin and PoP (and even expansions after those), Beastlords were a bit of a Red Herring and threads started about class balance where they were mentioned always turned into flame fests because of it (esp once the Magicians rolled in).

As far as Beastlords pulling.  They're a substitute puller NOW.  But NOW is like 10 years after they were added to the game.  Things were different when Luclin launched and SOE had a whole decade to smooth out some of the obvious balance issues (some of which persisted for years).

In any case, it should not be a big deal that Beastlords were out of balance in EQ1.  EQ1 and EQ2 are completely different games with different designs, combat systems, content design, etc.

[Lalen]

Trenshero@Antonia Bayle wrote:

We're talking about BLs when they were put into the game in EQ1, not after 6 years of Balancing after their introduction.  An SK could not out-solo a Beastlord in Luclin or PoP.  I don't know what game you were playing back then.  The only way an SK could solo with nearly the uptime of a Beastlord was to Snare Kite, which pretty much doomed them to Slow Killspeeds even if they didn't have *too many* resource issues (they did get low Lich levels, IIRC, but their mana pools were much smaller than an INT caster's).

Beastlords got decent DPS (PC + Pet), buffs, Patch Heals for themselves and big heals for their pet.  They could just slow a MOB and run through it.  EQ1 was different than EQ2.  In EQ2 there are classes that excel at soloing, but every class can do it decently.  In EQ1 the disparity between great soloers and decent soloers and especially "meh" soloers was HUGE.

The person you replied to is right.  Beastlords didn't really fall into line until later expansions where mechanic changes worked out of their favor.  Mobs started hitting for ridiculous amounts of damage, and they started Mitigating Slow Effects.  Other classes got more (or updated) utility and things started to balance out.

In Luclin and PoP (and even expansions after those), Beastlords were a bit of a Red Herring and threads started about class balance where they were mentioned always turned into flame fests because of it (esp once the Magicians rolled in).

As far as Beastlords pulling.  They're a substitute puller NOW.  But NOW is like 10 years after they were added to the game.  Things were different when Luclin launched and SOE had a whole decade to smooth out some of the obvious balance issues (some of which persisted for years).

In any case, it should not be a big deal that Beastlords were out of balance in EQ1.  EQ1 and EQ2 are completely different games with different designs, combat systems, content design, etc.

The point is, mages got more for their pets at start -- Pet LOH = Mage not Bsty.  And SK's that had decent gear could spank a bsty as well as a bst ran out of mana fairly quick trying to heal his pet or himself.

Granted the taps for SK's blew when they first came out, they did progressivly get better, and when Luclin came out with the bstys SK's still (imo) held the upperhand on soloing.  Here is why:  Bstys we put into a very rediculious category, unlike mages they couldn't just sit back and let that pet tank -- some mobs WOULD kill it too quickly and run the bl out of mana before the pet killed the mob -- so the bl had to hand-to-hand the mob, and like you said, unlike EQ2, when a player runs up to a mob where a pet has agro, just with 1 pt of hate, the mob turns on the player, ignoring the pet.  This is what was problematic for bst soloing as for their self heals were WEAKER than SK taps at the time.

But the boiling point was that bstys did what they were designed to do... DPS.  Now (yes 10 years later) they can't even do that.

My point is, bstys were not that OP when they were released, in fact if they were OP it was only to appeal people at the time to re-roll.  But never were they op to the point of being broken as some suggest.

[Odys]

Bl were not shinning that much in group. Their slo/haste always remained quite inferior to the shaman/enchanter ones. Beaslords  were simply easy mode soloers.  Unlike bards, wizzies, druids that needed to apply risky and dynamic kiting strategies, beaslord simply tanked and spanked opponents.

They soloed almost like mages with the earth pet, with small differences : they could share teh beating with the pet and they had good debuf. Their mana regen was also another asset.

I knew good mage almost able to do what BL did, but it was way more risky and you needed more skill.

In a sense BL were applauded because they were the perfect easy mode soloer.

The BL were clearly inspired by soloing shamen, post 45 shaman could actually play almost exactly like a Beaslord. But they had a much weaker pet (puppie my love) and so a much larger part of the tanking was done by the shaman.

According to SOE infamy record i strongly believe that Blords will be so much owvrpowered that crusaders will be jealous.

[Lalen]

Gorock@Storms wrote:

Bl were not shinning that much in group. Their slo/haste always remained quite inferior to the shaman/enchanter ones. Beaslords  were simply easy mode soloers.  Unlike bards, wizzies, druids that needed to apply risky and dynamic kiting strategies, beaslord simply tanked and spanked opponents.

They soloed almost like mages with the earth pet, with small differences : they could share teh beating with the pet and they had good debuf. Their mana regen was also another asset.

I knew good mage almost able to do what BL did, but it was way more risky and you needed more skill.

In a sense BL were applauded because they were the perfect easy mode soloer.

The BL were clearly inspired by soloing shamen, post 45 shaman could actually play almost exactly like a Beaslord. But they had a much weaker pet (puppie my love) and so a much larger part of the tanking was done by the shaman.

According to SOE infamy record i strongly believe that Blords will be so much owvrpowered that crusaders will be jealous.

Meh won't hurt my feelings in the least.. maybe they could also make it so they can tank so I can sit back and just dps =P

[Trensharo]

Lalen@Everfrost wrote:

Trenshero@Antonia Bayle wrote:

We're talking about BLs when they were put into the game in EQ1, not after 6 years of Balancing after their introduction.  An SK could not out-solo a Beastlord in Luclin or PoP.  I don't know what game you were playing back then.  The only way an SK could solo with nearly the uptime of a Beastlord was to Snare Kite, which pretty much doomed them to Slow Killspeeds even if they didn't have *too many* resource issues (they did get low Lich levels, IIRC, but their mana pools were much smaller than an INT caster's).

Beastlords got decent DPS (PC + Pet), buffs, Patch Heals for themselves and big heals for their pet.  They could just slow a MOB and run through it.  EQ1 was different than EQ2.  In EQ2 there are classes that excel at soloing, but every class can do it decently.  In EQ1 the disparity between great soloers and decent soloers and especially "meh" soloers was HUGE.

The person you replied to is right.  Beastlords didn't really fall into line until later expansions where mechanic changes worked out of their favor.  Mobs started hitting for ridiculous amounts of damage, and they started Mitigating Slow Effects.  Other classes got more (or updated) utility and things started to balance out.

In Luclin and PoP (and even expansions after those), Beastlords were a bit of a Red Herring and threads started about class balance where they were mentioned always turned into flame fests because of it (esp once the Magicians rolled in).

As far as Beastlords pulling.  They're a substitute puller NOW.  But NOW is like 10 years after they were added to the game.  Things were different when Luclin launched and SOE had a whole decade to smooth out some of the obvious balance issues (some of which persisted for years).

In any case, it should not be a big deal that Beastlords were out of balance in EQ1.  EQ1 and EQ2 are completely different games with different designs, combat systems, content design, etc.

The point is, mages got more for their pets at start -- Pet LOH = Mage not Bsty.  And SK's that had decent gear could spank a bsty as well as a bst ran out of mana fairly quick trying to heal his pet or himself.

No.  Pet LoH was an AA.  Beastlord Pet Heals were at least 20% more effective than Mage and Necro Pet Heals, and they got buffs for their pet and themselves far and away beyond what mages/necros got (I'm using Pet classes as a counter balance here).  They also got Damage Procs, IIRC.  Mages didn't get pet weapons until PoP, and that stacked with the Beastlord Proc Buff and could be traded freely to them, so no real gain there.  I'm not completely sure when the Mage Pet LoH AA was introduced, TBH (too long ago), but again, we're talking about the balance when the class was introduced, not after years balancing by SOE.

An SK could never spank a Beastlord in Soloing in Luclin or PoP.  I hate to sound so difinitive, but it was impossible given class designs and game mechanics.

Granted the taps for SK's blew when they first came out, they did progressivly get better, and when Luclin came out with the bstys SK's still (imo) held the upperhand on soloing.  Here is why:  Bstys we put into a very rediculious category, unlike mages they couldn't just sit back and let that pet tank -- some mobs WOULD kill it too quickly and run the bl out of mana before the pet killed the mob -- so the bl had to hand-to-hand the mob, and like you said, unlike EQ2, when a player runs up to a mob where a pet has agro, just with 1 pt of hate, the mob turns on the player, ignoring the pet.  This is what was problematic for bst soloing as for their self heals were WEAKER than SK taps at the time.

Beastlords could DPS with their pets.  Pop out to heal themselves and their pet, then get back in.  They got Attack Speed Slows, which were the most retardedly overused mechanic in EverQuest for over half a decade until MOBs started mitigating it.  SK's lifetaps were always weak as they were several levels behind Necro Lifetaps, and SKs could not reliably use that as a means to heal on difficult MOBs in that expansion (SoL) because they simply didn't have the resources.  Lifetaps had inflated mana costs to balance their Damage+Heal component, and SKs did not have huge mana pools.  They were designed to be inefficient nukes.

Again, there was no comparison between a Beastlord and an SK soloing.  Beastlord was so far superior that it wasn't even funny.  Beastlords were soloing PoP Tier 2 planes on Day 1.  SKs weren't, and if they were it was only half as fast and 1/3rd as efficient as a Beastlord.  This wasn't a coincidence.

BLs didn't need strong heals (for themselves).  They had a 65% Attack Speed slow which significantly reduced incoming damage.  They also could buff themselves far and away better than an SK (Haste, HP/AC, Run Speed, etc.).  SK had none of that.  A Beastlord could quasi-Agro Kite without snare and still outsolo an SK with Darkness Line snares and low Necro DoTs.

But the boiling point was that bstys did what they were designed to do... DPS.  Now (yes 10 years later) they can't even do that.

My point is, bstys were not that OP when they were released, in fact if they were OP it was only to appeal people at the time to re-roll.  But never were they op to the point of being broken as some suggest.

Yes, they were.  It's not even worth arguing about this at this point.  Anyone who played EQ1 at that point in time (probably even those who jumped on the Beastlord Bandwagon) could see that the class was out of balance.  SOE took a completely opposite approach when they introduced Berzerkers.

Also, did the Beastlord Epic weapon also proc some sort of Attack Speed slow?

Red Text.

EDIT:  Fixed bad text color.

[Trensharo]

Gorock@Storms wrote:

Bl were not shinning that much in group. Their slo/haste always remained quite inferior to the shaman/enchanter ones. Beaslords  were simply easy mode soloers.  Unlike bards, wizzies, druids that needed to apply risky and dynamic kiting strategies, beaslord simply tanked and spanked opponents.

BL Slow was ~60%.  Shaman/Chanter Slow was only 65/70%.  That's not much worse.

Their haste, again, was only ~10% behind Shaman/Chanter Haste (on both counts IIRC Chanters were slightly superior to Shaman, who were ahead of BL).

What made BLs shine in groups was the fact that their skillset allowed them to have a lot of synergy with other classes, especially as a DPS class who could replace a Chanter in groups with good pullers, still Regen mana, still Slow Mobs, provide additional buffs, and do good damage (or, at least more damage than a chanter).

Remember, by the time PoP rolled around SOE was fervently trying to get rid of the Holy Trinity resulting in tons of MOBs being immune to Mezz or charm (i.e. Plane of Storms).

They soloed almost like mages with the earth pet, with small differences : they could share teh beating with the pet and they had good debuf. Their mana regen was also another asset.

I knew good mage almost able to do what BL did, but it was way more risky and you needed more skill.

Mages didn't catch up to Beastlords IRT soloing until (to a lesser extent) OoW, and to a greater extent DoDH (I think that was the expansion where they got their temp pet on steroids).

By that time, MOBs were already hitting for ridiculous amounts of damage and mitigating Attack Speed Slow effects.

In a sense BL were applauded because they were the perfect easy mode soloer.

See above.  Necros, Bards, Druids, and Wizards (post 35 or so, when they got their snare) were all perfect easy mode soloers unless MOBs were immune to their effects (Bards got nerfed in PoP).  That's not why they were applauded.  In fact, all the classes I mentioned above were superior to Beastlords.

The BL were clearly inspired by soloing shamen, post 45 shaman could actually play almost exactly like a Beaslord. But they had a much weaker pet (puppie my love) and so a much larger part of the tanking was done by the shaman.

 They were a Monk/Shaman Hybrid, so yea.

According to SOE infamy record i strongly believe that Blords will be so much owvrpowered that crusaders will be jealous.

I still don't think what BLs were in EQ1 has anything to do with what they will be in EQ2.  There aren't even the same devs working on both games, IIRC.

It's nice to reflect on how things were back then, though

EDIT:  Typos.

[Lalen]

Trenshero@Antonia Bayle wrote:

Gorock@Storms wrote:

Bl were not shinning that much in group. Their slo/haste always remained quite inferior to the shaman/enchanter ones. Beaslords  were simply easy mode soloers.  Unlike bards, wizzies, druids that needed to apply risky and dynamic kiting strategies, beaslord simply tanked and spanked opponents.

BL Slow was ~60%.  Shaman/Chanter Slow was only 65/70%.  That's not much worse.

Their haste, again, was only ~10% behind Shaman/Chanter Haste (on both counts IIRC Chanters were slightly superior to Shaman, who were ahead of BL).

What made BLs shine in groups was the fact that their skillset allowed them to have a lot of synergy with other classes, especially as a DPS class who could replace a Chanter in groups with good pullers, still Regen mana, still Slow Mobs, provide additional buffs, and do good damage (or, at least more damage than a chanter).

Remember, by the time PoP rolled around SOE was fervently trying to get rid of the Holy Trinity resulting in tons of MOBs being immune to Mezz or charm (i.e. Plane of Storms).

They soloed almost like mages with the earth pet, with small differences : they could share teh beating with the pet and they had good debuf. Their mana regen was also another asset.

I knew good mage almost able to do what BL did, but it was way more risky and you needed more skill.

Mages didn't catch up to Beastlords IRT soloing until (to a lesser extent) OoW, and to a greater extent DoDH (I think that was the expansion where they got their temp pet on steroids).

By that time, MOBs were already hitting for ridiculous amounts of damage and mitigating Attack Speed Slow effects.

In a sense BL were applauded because they were the perfect easy mode soloer.

See above.  Necros, Bards, Druids, and Wizards (post 35 or so, when they got their snare) were all perfect easy mode soloers unless MOBs were immune to their effects (Bards got nerfed in PoP).  That's not why they were applauded.  In fact, all the classes I mentioned above were superior to Beastlords.

The BL were clearly inspired by soloing shamen, post 45 shaman could actually play almost exactly like a Beaslord. But they had a much weaker pet (puppie my love) and so a much larger part of the tanking was done by the shaman.

 They were a Monk/Shaman Hybrid, so yea.

According to SOE infamy record i strongly believe that Blords will be so much owvrpowered that crusaders will be jealous.

I still don't think what BLs were in EQ1 has anything to do with what they will be in EQ2.  There aren't even the same devs working on both games, IIRC.

My BL could never slow like that... The best they got was a level 45 slow which was something like 40% (before slow mit).

[Drumstix]

I loved my Beastlord in EQ1. Raided with him in end game content for almost two and a half expansions after Gates of Discord.

However this is a different game. There are already TWENTY FOUR classes. There are only twenty four slots in a raid. Why add another class into the mix of a game that is already almost 6 years old. Without class merging, the balance around raid content, itemization, epics, AAs, group setups.... it's all way too variable and certain classes almost always get the short end of the stick.

Regardless of what I type here, I know that this class will still be added. I think it's a huge mistake, and it will probably lead to more aggrevation in a game that is always so close to actually being solid. Whenever it gets to a point where there's tons of great stuff, but still a lot of broken/unfinished/untweaked content, we just get new content poured on top.

I love to see new life breathed into this game, but this is simply not the way to do it...

[Trensharo]

Lalen@Everfrost wrote:

Trenshero@Antonia Bayle wrote:

Gorock@Storms wrote:

Bl were not shinning that much in group. Their slo/haste always remained quite inferior to the shaman/enchanter ones. Beaslords  were simply easy mode soloers.  Unlike bards, wizzies, druids that needed to apply risky and dynamic kiting strategies, beaslord simply tanked and spanked opponents.

BL Slow was ~60%.  Shaman/Chanter Slow was only 65/70%.  That's not much worse.

Their haste, again, was only ~10% behind Shaman/Chanter Haste (on both counts IIRC Chanters were slightly superior to Shaman, who were ahead of BL).

What made BLs shine in groups was the fact that their skillset allowed them to have a lot of synergy with other classes, especially as a DPS class who could replace a Chanter in groups with good pullers, still Regen mana, still Slow Mobs, provide additional buffs, and do good damage (or, at least more damage than a chanter).

Remember, by the time PoP rolled around SOE was fervently trying to get rid of the Holy Trinity resulting in tons of MOBs being immune to Mezz or charm (i.e. Plane of Storms).

They soloed almost like mages with the earth pet, with small differences : they could share teh beating with the pet and they had good debuf. Their mana regen was also another asset.

I knew good mage almost able to do what BL did, but it was way more risky and you needed more skill.

Mages didn't catch up to Beastlords IRT soloing until (to a lesser extent) OoW, and to a greater extent DoDH (I think that was the expansion where they got their temp pet on steroids).

By that time, MOBs were already hitting for ridiculous amounts of damage and mitigating Attack Speed Slow effects.

In a sense BL were applauded because they were the perfect easy mode soloer.

See above.  Necros, Bards, Druids, and Wizards (post 35 or so, when they got their snare) were all perfect easy mode soloers unless MOBs were immune to their effects (Bards got nerfed in PoP).  That's not why they were applauded.  In fact, all the classes I mentioned above were superior to Beastlords.

The BL were clearly inspired by soloing shamen, post 45 shaman could actually play almost exactly like a Beaslord. But they had a much weaker pet (puppie my love) and so a much larger part of the tanking was done by the shaman.

 They were a Monk/Shaman Hybrid, so yea.

According to SOE infamy record i strongly believe that Blords will be so much owvrpowered that crusaders will be jealous.

I still don't think what BLs were in EQ1 has anything to do with what they will be in EQ2.  There aren't even the same devs working on both games, IIRC.

My BL could never slow like that... The best they got was a level 45 slow which was something like 40% (before slow mit).

EDIT:  Level 60 BST Slow was 50% : http://everquest.allakhazam.com/db/...html?spell=2942

Shaman Slow was 70%, and Enchanter was 70% at level 60.  Necro Undead Slow was 70%.

In PoP, Beastlords got a 65% Slow which put them almost on par with Enchanters, and not much behind Shaman who upgraded to 75% in PoP:  http://everquest.allakhazam.com/db/...html?spell=3462

There was no slow MIT in Luclin or PoP.  And in PoP gear increased so much that you could do everything except maybe Plane of Fire and Earth (and raids, of course) with a Beastlord and have 0 issues, provided your tank wasn't too bad.  You could definitely do SolRo with one, cause we did it all the time.

[Lalen]

Drumstixx@Blackburrow wrote:

However this is a different game. There are already TWENTY FOUR classes. There are only twenty four slots in a raid. Why add another class into the mix of a game that is already almost 6 years old. Without class merging, the balance around raid content, itemization, epics, AAs, group setups.... it's all way too variable and certain classes almost always get the short end of the stick.

You gotta remember that a lot of the classes here are subclasses a polar good vs evil type of class (not most but yeah).

The question I would have is if BL's come out what alignment will they be on and will it be subclassed or what class will be its main class etc...

For instance, SK's and pallys are a subclass of crusaders, Inq and Templar subclass of Clerics, so... that begs the quesiton of where exactly they're going to "stick" a bl lol or if the addition of a BL will add actually TWO more classes (an evil and good component).