EQ Never

Elidroth_sl said:

You change classes by changing weapons. I doubt the team would make you go to a fixed location to change weapons, but I'm pretty sure it won't be allowed while in-combat.

Click to expand...

Can we get rid of "in combat" yet? There's got to be a better way.

Elidroth_sl said:

You change classes by changing weapons. I doubt the team would make you go to a fixed location to change weapons, but I'm pretty sure it won't be allowed while in-combat.

Click to expand...

Weird. That's a huge loss of a massive potential revenue stream from the cash shop.

I was under the impression that each class had 2 potential weapon options. I of course assumed that you could switch these weapon selections out anywhere, but switch class anywhere? Feels like a missed opportunity.

But then we'd end up with a 500 slot armory chest like FFXIV with up to 80 different weapons and at least 40 saved gear sets.

a_skeleton_02_sl said:

It's an easy way to balance game mechanics that would be easily exploitable if they could be used in combat.

What suggestion do you have?

Click to expand...

None really but I don't like the rigid barriers around gameplay these days. Fix the exploitable mechanics instead I guess. I'm not upset if people can camp out on a wipe or mount up if they're about to die to some random overworld mob. Want to restrict swapping specs in combat? Make it take 30secs, one minute etc...

In combat should be exclusive to rogues only so when they decide to initiate a fight they have to see it through, that ill support.

Or just make the switch like the dual class switch in wow where its instant but you have to be out of combat to make the change. Given how many classes they seem to be making I am guessing its going to be pretty fast flipping from one class to another but from the sounds of it you would also have to switch gear as well as class as each class has access to two weapon sets.

I'm sure they want switching to be extremely easy because Darren was talking about getting a single new item and changing your play/class to use items to their full potential. He said they wanted people to be excited about getting new loot regardless of what it did or what you play.

That sounds like they're taking it too far. I don't see how they'll be able to maintain "omg exciting item" forever. It's got to get old eventually. Are they planning for that?

velk_sl said:

Casters usually get vastly improved defensive abilities - for instance being able to attack from range with no danger of retaliation ;p Along with various forms of crowd control. Giving them that AND equal armor and health would probably be controversial.

Still, I could see a game where spellcasters have equal health/armor, have to be in melee range at all times and have no more disabling abilities than their melee counterparts.

Or you could go with 'fuck the melee, everyone is a spellcaster' approach.

Click to expand...

Have HP be racially based, not class based. Then the passives/abilities of the classes determine mitigation/avoidance/absorption. Human Wizard has 3k hp, Human Warrior has 3k hp. An arrow hits the wizard, he loses 300. An arrow hits the warrior, he loses 200. Extrapolate. This can be done with class-based passives as well to further differentiate. Or with armor. Or a combination of the above. Hp doesn't need to change, just that the value of HP is measured differently by each class. In other words, every class has the same static HP, but their "effective health" is different.

Malakriss_sl said:

But then we'd end up with a 500 slot armory chest like FFXIV with up to 80 different weapons and at least 40 saved gear sets.

Click to expand...

smh. love having a whole set of gear in my bags tho.

Rezz_sl said:

In other words, every class has the same static HP, but their "effective health" is different.

Click to expand...

This is exactly what varying levels of armor and the ability to replenish it will accomplish.

Agraza_sl said:

That sounds like they're taking it too far. I don't see how they'll be able to maintain "omg exciting item" forever. It's got to get old eventually. Are they planning for that?

Click to expand...

I think he probably overly hyped it by talking like you're going to be excited about every single item. That said, since items are going to be ability based and not stat based, they're going to have a ton of flexibility so I can see where he was going with it. Something with +20% nature ability damage is going to be useful to not only nature classes, but anyone using nature abilities on different classes. One item could rebalance an ability so much as to change your entire play style if you decide to use it.

Mmorpg and single player rpgs will eventually over complicate themselves and get so convoluted they all flip back over to themselves in how they started, more simple with thoughtful tactics etc rather than actiony, I was hoping for that to happen once bravely default got such high regards in the main FF series but I will have to wait for FF16 for my dreams and apparently EQN2 on the Mmo side, here's to hope!

zzeris_sl said:

A character that does 500 damage per minute at long range is just the same as one that does 500 at close range.

Click to expand...

No, no they are not. The ranged always has an enormous tactical advantage - pulling, kiting, aggro ping-pong, ability avoidance, spacing are just some of the huge differences. The only time they'd be equivalent is when attacking a immobile defenseless spawn like a target dummy. Even then, positioning could be an issue depending on the collision detection.

Mobs could be created to put the ranged at a disadvantage just as they could put melee at a disadvantage. Player skills could also be developed similarly. Maybe skills should not only have max distances but also minimum distances.

Hell, EQ had methods of dealing with ranged dps. It was called summoning and using ranged attacks. Melee could get a defensive/avoidance buff when they are close to a melee oriented mob, while ranged/caster classes wouldn't get that so when they do get hit, they get hit a lot harder. There's more than a few ways to deal with ranged classes having such a big advantage.

As to why a mage wouldn't wear heavy armor... well he could, but then his spells would be much weaker/less varied or whatever to compensate for the added protection. And regardless, he wouldn't have the passives that a heavy armor melee would to enhance his defense. DnD did this by having the Arcane Spell Failure % on any armor above cloth/light armor in 3rd edition.

If we use the ways you quoted to even up the ranged vs melee, then whats the point of you having to be a paper doll? I didnt really think about it the other day, but after some thought - that question does seem to have some legitimacy. As it stands right now in MMO's - A Warrior hits a mob for 600 four times over three seconds. A wizard takes 3 seconds to cast a 2400 damage nuke. If DND had more impact, just for example, a Warrior would do 20 damage in one round when a mage would do 60 damage in one round. That justified being weaker. But FF14, FF10, WoW, ESO,... fuck most mmos I know of .. Wizards do the same damage as Warriors and vice versa. There is just no point in being a paper doll, besides fulfilling the classic "look."

Looking past the light armor component a caster still needs to remain stationary for those 3 seconds while the melee can reorient and strafe around their target while attacking. They've always thrown in things like pushback, spell delays, and interrupts that can be used against casters in addition to every other CC that works on melee.

With the limited ability slots for EQN are there even going to be resource pools like mana? Or will everything be cast time and cooldown based, meaning there is no "burn through your mana bar" option to even consider? Then we'd be back to the WoW hunter problem with mobile ranged owning melee and casters. How much of an advantage would a pet class have in such a low action and restricted counter system?