EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire

 

Go Back   EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire > EverQuest II > Class Discussion > Fighter's Arena > Guardian
Members List Search Mark Forums Read

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-23-2005, 06:55 PM   #181
Gaige

Loremaster
Gaige's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Arizona
Posts: 9,500
Default



SageMarrow wrote:

these are different times sweet heart.... EQ1 is better than both WoW and EQ2 to me.. .so lets not go there.  But here you are, playing EQ2 and proving his point.

Developers know exactly how to beat you now. In that time, when eq1 was king... keep in mind that they were concentrating on mimicing, not besting.

NOW, the student has become the teacher in a sense and if you believe for one second that you will be seeing a bunch of EQ ripoffs this time around... LOL..

I will be waiting with my I told you so.

Thats not to say that people wont play. They will. Someone will always be here tapping at the macros. But i can gaurantee you that 350,000 wont be that much in 8 months....  Assumption.

you can bet that on anything. These are different days and times and a totally different breed of player.


You have no idea if Vanguard will even be good, at all.

You've said yourself that you thought EQ2 was going to be amazing and everything, pre-release SMILEY

__________________
Gaige is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2005, 07:03 PM   #182
Tami

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 57
Default



SageMarrow wrote:

these are different times sweet heart.... EQ1 is better than both WoW and EQ2 to me.. .so lets not go there.

Developers know exactly how to beat you now. In that time, when eq1 was king... keep in mind that they were concentrating on mimicing, not besting.

NOW, the student has become the teacher in a sense and if you believe for one second that you will be seeing a bunch of EQ ripoffs this time around... LOL..

I will be waiting with my I told you so.

Thats not to say that people wont play. They will. Someone will always be here tapping at the macros. But i can gaurantee you that 350,000 wont be that much in 8 months....

you can bet that on anything. These are different days and times and a totally different breed of player.




Life is a visious circle, and I tend to agree .. the 'next gen' games are going to go back to more of an EQ1 style as they are seeing how, as much as people [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]ed, its still a strong and desired genre.

What EQ2 got right (before you pan these, see the 'what got wrong part'):

1) Instancing

2) Mob engagement locking

3) Class diversity.

4) Graphics/Game engine

5) Raid size

What EQ2 got wrong:

1) Instancing has so many promises, and while EQ2 did (IMO) get the concept and engine right, they failed in content.  Fundamentally Instancing and Mob Locking is there to control the 'balancing' part of engagments that EQ1 became so bad in ... i.e. its the anti-zerg 'code'.  Instead of creating instanced zones on the scale of 'NToV/Fire/etc' they created LDoN all over again with just a bigger 'end' mob .. very disapointing.

There was so much they could have done, and maybe with the expansion will trend toward this, but its excecution right now is a joke.

2) Im not sure how everyone else feels, but 100+ person guilds and 72 person raids just blow.  24 Person raids and thus a smaller, tigther, guild size is really fantastic.  But instead of taking advantage of that, they put in little to no content to support that environment .. really a disapointment, and ties into #1.

3) Class diversity had so much potentential, but instead of taking advantage of that they went and screwed it up with Marketing (claiming tanks are tanks) and with constant postings of 'mage->scout->fighter->priest' bs ... instead of leveraging different tiers (see my other posts in this regard) and building true 'roles' into the game.  See #4

4) As with Mob Linking and Instancing, the engagment system in general had some real promise.  The first two of those three being focused on anti-zerging and the later to truely balance the event to the group/raid.  But with its design/execution they ended up creating a 'Plate Figther->Priest' environment with (and read posts, you can see the undertone) 'drones' filling the rest of the spot.  The utility of the rest of the group really is mimimal and is strictly there for DPS ... this was not the case in EQ1 where slows/heals/mezing/pulling/etc all came into play and the focus was on really on soley 2 people.

5) #4 continues, in my mind, with so much potential to build in stratigic design but they blew it here as well.  Sure some thought needs to go into each raid, but /shrug its mundane overall.  There rarely is need to worry about respawns, rare to worry about over pulls, rare to worry about power, if slow doesnt stick 'oh well, next time', etc .. again this is really mimimized, and I could go on and on, but in general its really fustrating how they blew it here.

6) Risk/Reward .. hell, i wont get into this .. everyone understands how risk/reward in EQ2 had so much potential and went down the tubes.

Anyways .. just a few of my thoughts .. and yeah, I tend to agree we will see MMO's start to circle arround and get away from catering they way EQ2 has.  Solo play is important but it shouldnt be so focused on that it destorys the game (come on, especially a frikin MMO), instancing and engagment locking has alot of 'tuning/anti-zerg/strat' capablities but its implementation has to change, and so on

Added: No, no one knows if Vanguard will be any good .. but we can hope a game company, run by gamers, get it right over what is currently perceived as sales/marketing driven decisions.

Added again: Read this post (http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=Newbie&message.id=122401) .. and if are the same type of player I am you really will get tossed off your seat and see just the type of player EQ2 seems to be focused on.  Thats not bad, but is not what was sold to us (IMO) and is not whats going to breed longevity and popularity that EQ1 has/had.

Message Edited by Tamian on 04-23-2005 08:13 AM

Tami is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2005, 08:52 PM   #183
ugl

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 230
Default



Tamian wrote:


SageMarrow wrote:

these are different times sweet heart.... EQ1 is better than both WoW and EQ2 to me.. .so lets not go there.

Developers know exactly how to beat you now. In that time, when eq1 was king... keep in mind that they were concentrating on mimicing, not besting.

NOW, the student has become the teacher in a sense and if you believe for one second that you will be seeing a bunch of EQ ripoffs this time around... LOL..

I will be waiting with my I told you so.

Thats not to say that people wont play. They will. Someone will always be here tapping at the macros. But i can gaurantee you that 350,000 wont be that much in 8 months....

you can bet that on anything. These are different days and times and a totally different breed of player.




Life is a visious circle, and I tend to agree .. the 'next gen' games are going to go back to more of an EQ1 style as they are seeing how, as much as people [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]ed, its still a strong and desired genre.

What EQ2 got right (before you pan these, see the 'what got wrong part'):

1) Instancing

2) Mob engagement locking

3) Class diversity.

4) Graphics/Game engine

5) Raid size

What EQ2 got wrong:

1) Instancing has so many promises, and while EQ2 did (IMO) get the concept and engine right, they failed in content.  Fundamentally Instancing and Mob Locking is there to control the 'balancing' part of engagments that EQ1 became so bad in ... i.e. its the anti-zerg 'code'.  Instead of creating instanced zones on the scale of 'NToV/Fire/etc' they created LDoN all over again with just a bigger 'end' mob .. very disapointing.

There was so much they could have done, and maybe with the expansion will trend toward this, but its excecution right now is a joke.

2) Im not sure how everyone else feels, but 100+ person guilds and 72 person raids just blow.  24 Person raids and thus a smaller, tigther, guild size is really fantastic.  But instead of taking advantage of that, they put in little to no content to support that environment .. really a disapointment, and ties into #1.

3) Class diversity had so much potentential, but instead of taking advantage of that they went and screwed it up with Marketing (claiming tanks are tanks) and with constant postings of 'mage->scout->fighter->priest' bs ... instead of leveraging different tiers (see my other posts in this regard) and building true 'roles' into the game.  See #4

4) As with Mob Linking and Instancing, the engagment system in general had some real promise.  The first two of those three being focused on anti-zerging and the later to truely balance the event to the group/raid.  But with its design/execution they ended up creating a 'Plate Figther->Priest' environment with (and read posts, you can see the undertone) 'drones' filling the rest of the spot.  The utility of the rest of the group really is mimimal and is strictly there for DPS ... this was not the case in EQ1 where slows/heals/mezing/pulling/etc all came into play and the focus was on really on soley 2 people.

5) #4 continues, in my mind, with so much potential to build in stratigic design but they blew it here as well.  Sure some thought needs to go into each raid, but /shrug its mundane overall.  There rarely is need to worry about respawns, rare to worry about over pulls, rare to worry about power, if slow doesnt stick 'oh well, next time', etc .. again this is really mimimized, and I could go on and on, but in general its really fustrating how they blew it here.

6) Risk/Reward .. hell, i wont get into this .. everyone understands how risk/reward in EQ2 had so much potential and went down the tubes.

Anyways .. just a few of my thoughts .. and yeah, I tend to agree we will see MMO's start to circle arround and get away from catering they way EQ2 has.  Solo play is important but it shouldnt be so focused on that it destorys the game (come on, especially a frikin MMO), instancing and engagment locking has alot of 'tuning/anti-zerg/strat' capablities but its implementation has to change, and so on

Added: No, no one knows if Vanguard will be any good .. but we can hope a game company, run by gamers, get it right over what is currently perceived as sales/marketing driven decisions.

Added again: Read this post (http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=Newbie&message.id=122401) .. and if are the same type of player I am you really will get tossed off your seat and see just the type of player EQ2 seems to be focused on.  Thats not bad, but is not what was sold to us (IMO) and is not whats going to breed longevity and popularity that EQ1 has/had.

Message Edited by Tamian on 04-23-2005 08:13 AM


Wow, nice post. 
ugl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2005, 10:29 PM   #184
SageMarrow

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 958
Default

Gage, Tamians post is my reply...

We all know of your fanboism at times where this game is concerend. But in true reply to what you said. I have also said MANY times that this game is primarily filler until something better comes along. And i dont see what i am looking for in that *other game* and when it comes along. I will wave bon voyage to EQ2...

Tamian said it better than any one else:

 No, no one knows if Vanguard will be any good .. but we can hope a game company, run by gamers, get it right over what is currently perceived as sales/marketing driven decisions.
SageMarrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2005, 10:56 PM   #185
Ibis

General
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 155
Default

I want to have tamian's baby!
Ibis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2005, 06:39 PM   #186
Tami

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 57
Default

Thank you for the feedback Sage

Ibishi wrote:
I want to have tamian's baby!



And /blush Ibishi
Tami is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2005, 09:15 AM   #187
Fafnir

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 122
Default



Tamian wrote:

What Tamian wrote is the best summary of EQ2 that I've seen.
 
Good job.
 
Now if only it would change for the better, not the worse.  SOE is blowing it even further with all of this make everyone the same cr8p.
 
Fafnir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2005, 09:41 PM   #188
Corv

 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 138
Default


Tamian wrote:

What EQ2 got wrong:

1) Instancing has so many promises, and while EQ2 did (IMO) get the concept and engine right, they failed in content.  Fundamentally Instancing and Mob Locking is there to control the 'balancing' part of engagments that EQ1 became so bad in ... i.e. its the anti-zerg 'code'.  Instead of creating instanced zones on the scale of 'NToV/Fire/etc' they created LDoN all over again with just a bigger 'end' mob .. very disapointing.

There was so much they could have done, and maybe with the expansion will trend toward this, but its excecution right now is a joke.

They definately used instancing better that WoW did.  In WoW, all dungeons are single group/raid instances and all outdoor areas are non-instanced.  On a crowded server during primetime almost nothing can be accomplished in an outdoor zone, and dungeons completely lack the human element of unpredictability.  There are no trains (not even the watered down EQ2 variety), no competition for spawns, no inter-group encounters, etc..   That being said, the current content of EQ2 closely matches pre-Kunark EQ1.  There are some big mobs inside of dungeons where single groups can play like Naggy and Vox of old, but not much in the way of raid zones.  (There wasn't a single raid zone prior to Kunark in EQ1.)  Given how much EQ2 has inherited from EQ1, is it any surprise that their zone-release plans are following suit?  Why spend time making raid zones prior to release when it will be months before there will be guilds ready to handle them?  If they stick to the pattern established by EQ1, we'll see at least one major raid-zone in the first expansion that will take months to crack, and quite probably several in the following expansion.    

2) Im not sure how everyone else feels, but 100+ person guilds and 72 person raids just blow.  24 Person raids and thus a smaller, tigther, guild size is really fantastic.  But instead of taking advantage of that, they put in little to no content to support that environment .. really a disapointment, and ties into #1. Although it certainly is a lot easier to get 24 people together for a raid and also to keep them organized, I think the major reason for raid size limits is simply a matter of graphical lag.  EQ2's engine just can't handle that many players with current hardware.  I'd expect this cap to go up in a few years, judging by how EQ1 raid content gradually required more and more people.  As I said above, I don't think it's wise to judge EQ2's endgame by what is currently in the game.  People were going stir-crazy farming just Naggy and Vox until Kunark arrived and Veeshan's Peak came along, as well as all the levelling and questing required just to get in there. 

3) Class diversity had so much potentential, but instead of taking advantage of that they went and screwed it up with Marketing (claiming tanks are tanks) and with constant postings of 'mage->scout->fighter->priest' bs ... instead of leveraging different tiers (see my other posts in this regard) and building true 'roles' into the game.  See #4

The old EQ1 class roles are mostly still there, although hybrids aren't as watered down as they used to be and pure classes no longer have the same advantages.  Monk pulling is gone, as I understand it is also gone from EQ1, but enchanters are still a credible crowd control class, albeit pale shadows of their former selves.  (CC in WoW is a joke.  The best CC class can turn one mob at a time into sheep!)  The problem isn't the classes though.  It's the content.   (see below)

4) As with Mob Linking and Instancing, the engagment system in general had some real promise.  The first two of those three being focused on anti-zerging and the later to truely balance the event to the group/raid.  But with its design/execution they ended up creating a 'Plate Figther->Priest' environment with (and read posts, you can see the undertone) 'drones' filling the rest of the spot.  The utility of the rest of the group really is mimimal and is strictly there for DPS ... this was not the case in EQ1 where slows/heals/mezing/pulling/etc all came into play and the focus was on really on soley 2 people.

The encounter system, combined with a gross underuse of social aggro, have made it very difficult to pull more than one encounter at a time unless you're deliberately trying to do so.   A muliple mob encounter in EQ2 is really just one mob split into 4 chunks, and as such, poses roughtly the same challenge as a single mob.  In EQ1 multiple mob pulls were the norm in most challenging places, even with a monk FD-splitting.   This is why Enchanters were practically manditory in many places.  People whined about that to no end of course, so in EQ2 enchanters need only worry about CC on those *very* occasional bad pulls, and on multiple mob encounters tough enough to actually make a dent in the tanks armor.   Personally I think they should have fleshed out CC as a necessary group role and made it a part of the mage archtype, but instead they chose to marginalize it.   However, it's the way encounters and zones are designed that does this.   It is not impossible that this will change in the future because it's merely a matter of designing zones where pulling is not so trivial.

5) #4 continues, in my mind, with so much potential to build in stratigic design but they blew it here as well.  Sure some thought needs to go into each raid, but /shrug its mundane overall.  There rarely is need to worry about respawns, rare to worry about over pulls, rare to worry about power, if slow doesnt stick 'oh well, next time', etc .. again this is really mimimized, and I could go on and on, but in general its really fustrating how they blew it here.

I know a pattern is forming here, but I really do expect zone design to get a whole lot more complex and interesting with each expansion that comes out.  Hopefully we'll see some really high quality raid zones.  It wouldn't do to judge EQ1 by Naggy and Vox raids alone after all.  (For reference, the fire giants guarding Naggy's lair were all on a loonnng spawn timer (something like 24hrs) so you didn't have to worry about respawn back then either.)


Personally, I think the single biggest problem that's keeping EQ2's subscribership down is its inefficient, bloated engine!   Back when I played WoW I was using a 3-year old machine, and it ran *smoother* than EQ2 does on a machine I built just last month!  Much smoother.  That 3-year old PC didn't start to chug until there were well over 100 players on screen. 
  EQ2's engine is so poorly written that it will probably never run as smooth no matter how much brute power is thrown at it.  Sony really needs to work on optimizing the engine, reducing the complexity of certain areas in zones and cities, and perhaps they should even release some low-poly models that don't look like they came out an elephant's [Removed for Content]!  One of the best things they could do would be to include an option that dynamically turns eye-candy down/off to maintain a constant framerate, and then turns it back up when load isn't so heavy.  This isn't wishful thinking either.  *I* could write the code for this feature in my sleep.   I honestly have no clue why it hasn't already been done.   The inablity to maintain a constant, smooth framerate on bleeding edge hardware due to the lack of dynamic eye-candy adjustments will perpetuate the notion that EQ2's engine is a bloated hog that requires a bleeding-edge machine to run.   Sony needs to stop worrying about future-proofing their engine and start worrying about making it work well on *today*'s hardware at the very least, if not last years as well!

Message Edited by Corvan on 04-26-2005 10:51 AM

Corv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2005, 12:03 AM   #189
Banditman

Loremaster
Banditman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 7,459
Default

Unreal 2 is not exactly the most friendly engine for many moving objects at once. That's why the FPS limit their number of players.
__________________
Banditman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2005, 12:52 AM   #190
Dart

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 297
Default

Yes lets have all tanks ... tank equally. And I want a 500 HP heal and wards. I want FD, I want invis, I want mend, I want safe fall, I want Lifetaps.. See a trend?
 
IMHO the problem lies in the game design. They sold the guardian as a def tank, so you want to have all tanks tank equally...? Making all tanks 'tank equally' in my opinion will only make things worse as the Guardian will still come out ahead with more hps/AC because they sacrificed casting spells, and all the other stuff that goes with the other tank classes.
 
What SOE needs to do is make Content match up to the different types of 'tank' classes accordingly, making the flavor of tank situational. Example SK's could be immune to some Undead boss effects, making them the 'preferred tank' for that encounter, this would create demand for all types of tanks in guilds, yet it wouldn't eliminate any one tank from tanking any one mob.. Its been posted by many other people here, and I think its the only solution to this dilemma. You can change this for that all day long (code wise), yet they will still drop the ball somewhere and have to fix the fix that fixed the fix... That's a Microsoft patch phrase /cackle.
 
Look I understand peoples frustration, but you have to realize if they make all tanks 'tank' equally, then the guard has 0 purpose, other than Higher HPs for tanking. We bring defensive buffs to the table, and a broken line of protection (which needs to be fixed). So now they cap Defense, and a paladin or sk or Monk can meet that cap, same as the guardian. If this should happen, then what does the guardian bring to the table, besides more HP's?
 
So again IMHO I think they need to address the tank issue via content, as we all know all tank classes can tank group content 1-50 with 0 problem, most raid encounters can be tanked by all tanks, there is a small % of raid content we are talking about that some folks feel they cant tank as non guardians. The answer would be ADD content that is specifically designed to be tanked by the different flavors of the tanks that SOE sold us. Short of that they will still face this problem years down the road. Much like the spiders were in PoA in EQlive, the best tanks for those were SK's or palys because of the casting agro they could generate, where as a War relied on taunts alone. Making the hybrid tanks a better choice (at least in my guild we did) there were other encounters that we specifically designated as paly or SK tank only because of the factors that came into play for that encounter.
 
Second thing is to add utility other than just Deff buffs or a broken line of intercept (One thing you have to realize about the protection line, it is rarely used, provides very little functionality atm in the game, mostly due to ineffectiveness). If people are doing their respective roles its not even needed, its the rare occasion that a nuker gets agro from over nuking, or the healer gets agro from healing.
 
Cliff notes:
 
Bring content that requires all types of tanks to 'tank' it.
 
Give guards a better utility line so if SOE plans on maling all tanks "tank equally' but to be honest if they vanilla everything down to the point of 4 main classes, this game will lose allot of appeal for me atleast.

Message Edited by Darton on 04-26-2005 02:15 PM

__________________
Phinny - 68th Warlock of Permafrost
Thunderfoot - 70th Bruiser Permafrost
You can't expect to wield supreme executive power just because some watery tart threw a sword at you!"
-Monty Python's Holy Grail-
Dart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2005, 04:09 AM   #191
SilvanE

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 10
Default



Tamian wrote:


SageMarrow wrote:

these are different times sweet heart.... EQ1 is better than both WoW and EQ2 to me.. .so lets not go there.

Developers know exactly how to beat you now. In that time, when eq1 was king... keep in mind that they were concentrating on mimicing, not besting.

NOW, the student has become the teacher in a sense and if you believe for one second that you will be seeing a bunch of EQ ripoffs this time around... LOL..

I will be waiting with my I told you so.

Thats not to say that people wont play. They will. Someone will always be here tapping at the macros. But i can gaurantee you that 350,000 wont be that much in 8 months....

you can bet that on anything. These are different days and times and a totally different breed of player.




Life is a visious circle, and I tend to agree .. the 'next gen' games are going to go back to more of an EQ1 style as they are seeing how, as much as people [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot]ed, its still a strong and desired genre.

What EQ2 got right (before you pan these, see the 'what got wrong part'):

1) Instancing

2) Mob engagement locking

3) Class diversity.

4) Graphics/Game engine

5) Raid size

.....



Best post ive seen on EQ2...
 
First time I walked into baskin & robins ice cream I thought it was the greatest place on earth. So many flavors to choose from and they all tasted soo good but each in its own way. Could have been done with the classes in EQ2 without too much effort. They had the right idea just couldnt get it done in time for production. What we ended up with was McDonalds soft cones with the same two basic flavors and the option for a little hard chocolate on top.

Message Edited by SilvanEQ2 on 04-27-2005 08:41 PM

__________________
Silvan
50th Weaponsmith ~ 48th Guardian
Dark Blood - Crushbone
SilvanE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2005, 10:40 PM   #192
deathhascome

Loremaster
deathhascome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 3
Default

I 100% agree with Darton i have a 50 guard on mm and my bro has a 50 pali, wife has a 50 fury and said thing is for 1 she cleaned both of us up in dueling after the change. Then we got that fun out of the way and hit a named mob in ls wife and i duo'd him sat and owned him np took 5 of us 2 tries after patch hmm something wrong here. i lost a k of hps and more mit and avoid than i could count. So i asked my bro what they do to you samew thing nerf'd the smeg out of him.

 

i believe the buff stacking may have been an issue np remove it but i don't think our hps and mit should have been touched. me and my bro duo alot together and we tank raids together also granted he can not take the damage i can but for a ma there is no one better he can heal he can tank and he would have most of the dps, it is my job to tank all i have is mad hps and def i am not a dps class and any guard whos says they are needs to play a differant toon because they gimped theirs.

 

I have lost over 1500 mit and well over 2k hps raid buffed, then you add in res suck now so mobs that hit for 1k to 1500 are now doing 2 to 3 times that hmm raid of 20 healers 2 dps and 2 tanks and 3 hours to do 5 min mob.

 

just my 2cp worth i have an alt to run but my main is now worthless all the time and sweet invested flushed down the toliet

 

ty soe,

 

maybe we will get lucky and they will unjack the palis and guards and sk's because imho they are the true tanks who has every heard of a monk with more hps than a guardian /pali they have way better avoid they need more avoid not hps.

 

LMB 50 guardian of the cross (MM)

ps please do not get angry at me for not mentioning much about sk's, i do not know many and do not know the class as well but pretty sure you got jacked like the pali's did

deathhascome is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:39 AM.

vBulletin skin by: CompleteGFX.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All threads and posts originally from the EQ2 and Station forums operated by Sony Online Entertainment. Their use is by express written permission.