by Moorgard on 2001-09-06
If you want to see the whole post and the commentary that follows, you can read it on the Monkly Business message board.Here are the highlights of what Smed revealed:
- Luclin will be geared towards single-group combat, with more dungeons along the lines of Karnors and Sebilis. Verant knows that there are already some existing dungeons of this kind that are underused, but understand that these are not well balanced in terms of risk vs. reward. They will be more careful with this concept in the Luclin dungeons.
- There will be a limited number of "raid" zones--probably three or four.
- The moon is round, and zones will wrap around it--meaning you can go from zone A to B to C to A again. A novel concept we might see on Norrath if the missing continent ever gets added.
- There will be several cities, and faction will play a role. Whether or not faction will be taken to the extent that it is on Velious wasn't revealed.
- The Vah'Shir will be a large race with stats similar to barbarians.
- Beastlords will primarily fight without weapons. Previous reports have indicated that there will be beastlord-specific weapons, but perhaps--like monks--this new class will have a choice of combat types.
- Verant is happy with the way classes are balanced at 50, and their objective is to adjust the skill caps or skill tables to achieve close to the same balance at 60. The defensive skill of rangers was specifically mentioned. Supposedly, the goal is to give more flexibility in the viable class combinations and reduce the superiority of certain classes. The goal is to have classes balanced before or at the release of Luclin.
Okay, here we go... rant time.
The stuff about Luclin is fine. Uberguilds may not enjoy the moon as much as Velious, but EQ shouldn't be geared solely toward the high-end game anyway. As long as risk vs. reward is in perspective, a new dungeon full of frogloks will draw just as many campers as ever.
But this stuff about balance... we've heard it all before. Verant broke the game with the release of Kunark, pure and simple--and they admitted it to us at FanFaire.
If Verant honestly, truly liked the way the game was balanced at 50, why the hell did they rip it to pieces when the level cap was raised to 60? In case you've forgotten, let's take a look at some of the things that went down the crapper in terms of balance.
- Rangers lagged far behind in defense, causing universal mocking of the class and endless jokes about "ranger feign death."
- Monks went from having higher skill caps in offensive and defensive skills to being below warriors in terms of damage output and armor class.
- Paladins and shadowknights saw their offensive capabilities dwindle to being on par with a bowl of beer cheese soup.
- Warriors gained the only really useful discipline that, combined with vastly superior hitpoints, made them the only viable tanks.
- Rogues had their damage output thrown into the stratosphere. Shut up, rogues... it's true!
- Spell effectiveness was reduced across the board. Chanters can't mez, shamans can't slow, necros became mana batteries, druids can't do damage, and mages became transporters a la Star Trek.
- Bards... well... who plays a bard, anyway? I'm sure something bad happened to them.
Does Verant really expect us to believe that they are going to do something about balance? Think how long ago those balance discussions took place... think how long Kunark has been out.
Well, okay. Perhaps the threat of competition (I'm not going to put another DAoC hyperlink on the word "competition" again, ever, so just assume there's one there) is motivating them to fix the game and make players happy again. But is it too late? Can you possibly count the number of shamans, rangers, paladins, and necros who have quit the game or moved on to the "mainstream" classes of warrior and cleric?
Balance at this point would be a tall order. Verant can't by any stretch of the imagination decrease the effectiveness of warriors or the necessity of clerics, so that leaves improving other classes as the only option.
I am loathe to tell you what's necessary to fix classes I don't play, but I can list some obvious things:
- Increase monk damage tables so they do more damage with each hit than a warrior would. Also, give monks some freaking hit points. What the hell, give rogues some hit points, too.
- Increase the defense caps for rangers so they can stay alive.
- Increase the offense caps on paladins so they feel like they're pulling their weight on raids--and not just against undead, either.
- Make spells work so that casters of all types can fulfil the role they signed up for. Mezzer, slower, nuker, healer... whatever.
Since Verant already hosed the skill cap system with Kunark, it leaves no room to improve many classes in this area. However, things like damage tables and hit points can be played with in order to bring melee classes more in line with each other. As far as casters go, spells and mob resistances can be altered to make casters more effective.
Verant keeps saying they want to balance the classes. Well, it's time to put up or shut up. They better give us some concrete info on what they're doing by the time Luclin comes out, or just drop it and tell us to live with it. EverQuest will remain a lot of fun regardless, but the self esteem of countless players would receive a much needed boost if class balance was really improved.
Players with high self esteem = happy subscribers. It's really very simple. Let's hope Verant sees it that way, too.