EQ Never

1,678
149
I like LFG tools that help people find other people, but not ones that automate the whole process of going to a dungeon. For example in Vanguard the LFG tool is just a list of people who turned the LFG on, so you can see who is looking, what class and level they are and then send them a message if you want. And you can also see groups that already formed that need more people. That's perfect imo.

The ones I don't like are the ones like Rift where nobody needs to communicate, ever. You just sit in town like an emo douchebag not talking to anyone, waiting for the LFG tool to automatically hook you up with 5 other emo douchebags, and then it automatically loads you in to an instanced dungeon and then you all run it together, yet in silence, because you're all a bunch of emo douchebags with no personality playing a douchebag game with no personally.

So yes I much prefer the first one. The most important thing is that the classes themselves are good for getting groups together. EQ sucked because of the strict holy trinity bullshit. You had pussies who wouldn't make a group without an evaccer, chanter, warrior, and cleric. So it basically left half the classes out in the cold most of the time. So.. so.. shit.

But modern games improved that a lot. Vanguard did pretty well because the archetypes are more flexible (any of the 4 healers are equally good, not just Cleric, etc..). But my personal favorite was Rift with the soul switching thing. Some people didn't like that but I loved being the Rogue DPS and if I got a group together but it desperately needed a healer, I could just switch roles to bard. I really liked that.

Aww chill man. It's a fucking forum for gaming. How are you going to complain someone is talking to much? haha. I agree with 90% of what qwerty says. Not sure why he's determined to get RRP'ed by constantly insulting Draegan, but hey, to each his own. I like his opinions.
Lol well I never used to like him but I'm starting to warm to him, a bit.
 

arallu

Golden Knight of the Realm
536
47
So with the sandbox style EQN is going for, do you think we may see a skill based structure instead of level based? You can pick your general class area, which will come with a standard set of skills, but if you want to skill up other abilities like healing, then you have to find a trainer (npc or player)? Then you just have some passive skill that kind of determines your general power (say your hp/mana), but you train up your other skills by using them / paying an npc trainer.
 
1,678
149
I think they'll stick with classes. If I had to guess I would say that they will take the EQ classes, fit them more strictly in to archetypes like Vanguard, and have prestige classes that will come later as a DLC that you have to unlock and/or pay extra for. So something like this:

Defensive Fighters (Tanks):
1) Warrior
2) Paladin
3) Shadowknight
4) Berserker (Unlockable)

Offensive Fighters (melee dps)
1) Monk
2) Rogue
3) Ranger
4) Beast Lord (Unlockable)

Healers:
1) Cleric
2) Shaman
3) Druid
4) Bard (Unlockable)

Spell Casters:
1) Enchanter
2) Necromancer
3) Wizard
4) Magician (Unlockable)
 

supertouch_sl

shitlord
1,858
3
i'm not surprised rezz ignored me. when you spout drivel like "gamers back then weren't very smart," you're probably retarded.

anyway, what kind of lfg tool do you need beyond putting an lfg tag next to your name? the most time-consuming part about assembling a group in eq was finding a suitable camp. it never took me more than 2 minutes to find any class. mmos don't need to act like a fuckin' xbox live lobby.
 

Randin

Trakanon Raider
1,927
882
I think they'll stick with classes. If I had to guess I would say that they will take the EQ classes, fit them more strictly in to archetypes like Vanguard, and have prestige classes that will come later as a DLC that you have to unlock and/or pay extra for. So something like this:
I believe Smed has said the game will be class-based, so there is that. But God, I really hope they can move past the whole archetype thing it make class design so bloody formulaic. Developers need to learn to move on from having these neat little silos that everyone falls into, and come up with something that actually feels organic.
 

forehead

Trakanon Raider
205
418
To each their own, but one of the reasons I quit RIFT was because all the classes bled together. I liked how in EQ everyone had specific abilities and you knew what your group mates or guildies were (or should be) capable of and it was only the really great, cutting edge players who were able to break the class molds.
 

Flipmode

EQOA Refugee
2,091
312
To each their own, but one of the reasons I quit RIFT was because all the classes bled together. I liked how in EQ everyone had specific abilities and you knew what your group mates or guildies were (or should be) capable of and it was only the really great, cutting edge players who were able to break the class molds.
If you like cutting edge players who break the class mold, shouldn't you like Rift? Or am I misunderstanding what you're saying?
 

jello_sl

shitlord
24
0
The LFG tool can be good or bad. The bad part of it has already been touched upon by promoting player isolation as opposed to interaction: e.g. herp derping in town for an instance group to PvP/E - but that is an unfortunate symptom of the themepark design, not necessarily the fault of the LFG tool. In more open-world (sandbox if you will) gaming the LFG window is more benign simply because grouping, interacting, and dealing with the repercussions of your actions or inaction mean everything to your gaming experience - the LFG tool now becomes difficult to use as a crutch for being a slug. I like the idea because it is likely players are going to be spread out in a sandbox environment and the more players can interact the better, but I don't think its critical given the amount of means we have of communicating outside the game.
 

jello_sl

shitlord
24
0
If you like cutting edge players who break the class mold, shouldn't you like Rift? Or am I misunderstanding what you're saying?
I think he probably meant to say that people who knew how to play their respective class were a pleasure to adventure with. But I don't see how that is in juxtaposition with Rifts classless system as you are as likely to have good or bad players given certain roles. Perhaps it was just comforting (discomforting?) from the viewpoint that it was obvious when players were sucking it up or being a baller? I think either strict classes, hybrid, or skill based game could work. However I think a class based game lends more to the true MMORPG spirit of things as it gets away from the angle of you being special snowflake who can smite all evil and save the world. Class based system allow there to be a sense of responsibility and teamwork when you are out slaying untold evils. MMORPGs need more indians and less chiefs.
 

Cthon_sl

shitlord
25
0
Yeah, the LFG would be strickly dependent on the class structure, i.e. who is going to get left out? As a Wizzy in the early days of EQ, I mostly got groups through friends/guildys, so I wouldn't say that I wasn't a fan of LFG, because I was perma-lfg with that class, I just think there has got to be a better way. I like the "INSTANT ACTION" feature that Planetside 2 has. Let a group fill a spot with a specific level range, any class.

I think RIFT was amazing in terms of finally bringing real-time changes to an otherwise static mmo world, but the changes and restructuring of Souls and the constant need to re-macro every week or two became very taxing. And yeah, the insta-groups in RIFT promoted less player interaction, with the exception of world pvp. That was about the only time I conversed with anyone besides guildmates (minus dungeons). I'd like to see some RIFT spontaneous mob generation tech in EQN.
 

Illuziun

Bronze Knight of the Realm
209
16
They need to bring back diversity in classes and stop feeding into the damn idea that everyone should be able to do anything just as good as any other class. Then they need to stop the cookie cutter shit with the simple 3 way skill trees and actually move beyond this simple shit. In order for all of this to work, there is one major thing in its way, and that is PVP. PVP has killed all diversity in MMORPG's because of balance issues.
 

Lammy_sl

shitlord
43
0
There are a lot of retarded ideas in this thread, and a lot of retards that 'think' they know Sony's plan. The fact is, we know next to nothing right now and from the sounds of it, they don't know much yet either.
 

Agenor

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
2,466
6,385
There are a lot of retarded ideas in this thread, and a lot of retards that 'think' they know Sony's plan. The fact is, we know next to nothing right now and from the sounds of it, they don't know much yet either.
Sooo lets not have fun speculating on things, or theory craft. Sounds good. Will just throw up the Smed video, and wait till he releases more information on the game before we post.
 

Lammy_sl

shitlord
43
0
Sooo lets not have fun speculating on things, or theory craft. Sounds good. Will just throw up the Smed video, and wait till he releases more information on the game before we post.
Kicking ideas around and assuming certain things based on no information are two different things. I'm all for the creative thought process, that's why I read these forums.
 

Flipmode

EQOA Refugee
2,091
312
Last I checked, all of us are theorycrafting and not speculating what SOE is making. Only thing we know for sure is its a sandbox. No need to come in the thread and insult everyone.
 
We can not even speculate until we get a real definition of what they consider "sandbox" Sandbox's of certain types can be great until you dig to deep and realize that every cat in the neighborhood has been using it and you come out smelling like piss and realize that sand covered matchbox car you thought you grabbed was a giant turd.
 

Ukerric

Bearded Ape
<Silver Donator>
7,983
9,714
And never mind creating quests for all of that content.
Stop there. Just right there. If you're making 5000 zones, you're not making Universe of Everquest. You're making a sandbox game (or a fantasy EVE clone, which was the idea). At worst, you get randomly generated missions (like EVE). At best, you get a few long-term quests, all of which can be completed on a very large variety of zones.

Example: You are currently tasked with killing a Master Vampire. Your quest doesn't say "go to the Island of GED137 at GPS loc 170/165, kill the elite named Master Vampire that is spawning there every 5mn". Your quest says "Bring me the ashes from a slain Master Vampire". You have to figure out which zones may have Vampires around, decide which zone is the closest, go there, find out once in the zone where the Master Vampires might be spawning (probably that gothic-looking castle), get there, fight the lesser vampires and hope there's a Master around. You might find on EQNhead a guide who tells you that the author found Master Vampires in "this" island, which requires you 1 hour+ of travel (and the next commenter tells you that he found vamps somewhere else). But the designers cannot write a quest where the hero has to slay Master Vampire Buccula from the castle Dothra in the level 17-18 Carpathion area. The designer knows that you have Master Vampires in game, that there's enough spawn areas for them, and so include them in his quest. And that's all.
Getting players to all spread out amongst the different zones would be a monumental task.
Why? Competition for limited ressources (the hillside mines are always empty when you get there, as is the birch grove), plus a system of random missions that sends you where there's less people, and that should work. Remember: in this scheme, you have 5000 zones to REDUCE the population pressure, not to increase it.
EvE's 5000 zones works for EvE because it is primarily a PvP game where you usually don't want to run into too many other players at any one time.
And it would work for a "Everquest: Next" PvP sandbox game.

But not for a "Universe of Everquest" theme park PVE MMO, no. You want a theme park in the Everquest universe, there's one (with the number "2" on it).
 

Rezz

Mr. Poopybutthole
4,486
3,531
I imagine EQ:N will use classes since they are fairly iconic to the EQ brand, as well as Skills. Levels I can see but if they wanted to go for a more sandbox feel, they could do away with it. Now.. what they could do, and I doubt they will, would be to make race the primary determinant in the game that is unchangeable. Your class however, is. Observe:
You start the game as a Dark Elf (because they are awesome) and you run around Neriak doing Dark Elf shit. Stabbing backs, summoning imps, being sexy as fuck. But for a little bit you effectively don't have a class. You can use dark elf racial weapons and simple weapons while wearing simple armors, and you have access to the ability to hide and backstab as well as cast some minor necromancy/wizard/enchanter shit. Stuff that is paltry at best for all forms of progression, but all give you the option to pick your destiny, so to speak. So if you wanted to go the SK path (also known as best path) you would beat on shit with your simple weapons while getting hit with your simple armor and casting your shitty necro type spells. Once you reach predetermined plateaus within those skill sets, it tells you that to further progression in that combination of arts, you must forget that which doesn't fit into the mold. So dude picks SK and starts his unholy reign of terror and eventually caps all related skills that are determined to be "SK" centric.

Fast forward to a couple of months later. Dude decides he'd rather be a cleric for a change of pace, so he can, from his UI, mark the SK centric skills as "forgetting" and engages in combat again. He slowly gets worse and worse and his skills get worse and worse til he hits a predetermined floor where he can then re-open learning the skills of other archetypes. This gives him access to all the shitty rogue/wizard/cleric/etc skills and abilities again, so he starts casting Insignificant Healing and casting buffs or some shit til those specific skills hit the plateau, and then he starts learning the ways of the cleric. What happens is his old SK skill ranks slowly go down over time commiserate with the increase in cleric skills. Some skills can be flagged as unlearnable so you don't ever increase them, such as wearing a mishmash of light/heavy/medium/plate armor but only wanting plate skills to go up.

Or you could just make it so that you can't change classes ever. I'm ambivalent to the idea of changing, as when EQ comes out I'll play a SK and that's basically how that goes. It is just an idea to progress that concept.

When it comes to levels:
you could easily remove them and instead move the con system over to a series of comparative calculations revolving around skill level. Hell, you could make the entire con system a skill of it's own, where you start at even+ mobs are "Looks tough!" and below are "Looks weak!" and eventually lets you gauge how difficult a mob is directly in relation to your skills. "This monster seems to specialize in magic, but your strength of arms is greater!" or "This monster could easily kill a small number of you without flinching. Bring friends!" Yada yada. Increases through killing -any- type of mob as you progress through the game. Ie, a tradeskill focusing individual couldn't tell an orc from a orc, but someone who has been out slaying things can.

For replacing the concept of levels.. well, original EQ sort of actually had that to a degree. The skill levels that were dependent on you leveling could instead be the source of progression, not an unlockable based upon it. Lets go back to SK guy. His "level" would be tied to his primary skills: Martial weapons (an average of all weapon skills, meaning more powerful SKs know all weapons and not just the one they were twinked with) Plate armor, Channeling and Spell School: Necromancy. As all these things rise, he would con more powerful compared to other players that weren't as endowed. Make skill gain tied to fighting enemies who have their own skill ratings and you can only improve to +5 to what they have. Orcs in the commonlands have good weapon skills but bad magic defense. Blowing them up with spells doesn't gain you shitloads of + necromancy, but attacking them with weapons has a higher max threshold than necromancy increases from them. Not a gigantic margin, but that could easily be added to the game in the form of having to hunt for dangerous game to raise specific skills. The evil lich could be the only way to cap your necromancy skill by basically getting into a dot/nuke/spell duel with him and chaining the fuck out of your spells. This would also promote group play if higher level spells can only be used by certain skill levels, and a group is required to effectively fight the lich long enough for the necro to get a point or two. This can be expanded into creating a raid or multigroup setup where the only way to get the very last point to open up Mass: Summon Corpse, which would drag an entire raid's body back to the caster at once is to let your necros blast the shit out of Dracolich, for example.

I'm just full of examples, but the idea is pretty cut and dry. NPCs (not just monsters) have skill levels that represent their general difficulty. You can increase your skills by attacking stuff that is either slightly harder, on par or slightly weaker than you are in that area, but when you go beyond their abilities, you have to move on. Instead of staring at XP bars, you would get "You can no longer progress your Spell School: Necromancy on this target" or if you really need to say fuck you to all hand holding that badly, just have it not increase and don't tell the player. We all love checking our stats constantly to see if something changed, right?

Have mobs progressively get more powerful in various skills as you expand outward from home cities, to a median level around hubs such as the EC tunnel or what have you. Throw in your random rape mobs such as griffons or sand giants, by having them have much higher comparative skill levels so that fighting them pretty much always spells doom for the lower skilled players. Combined with the Con system being a measure of how much combat you have been involved in, you could create that experience of "Is this thing -really- that much harder?" to "OH SHIT FUCK FUCK RUN FUCK OH SHIT!" Hell, even give NPCs of increasing average skill levels an innate negative to player Con skill checks. Is that Griffon really that much harder than an orc shaman? Oh yes he is, but he'll con the same to a low con skill low player skill player.

The more I think about it, the more I like it. Higher level players who outpace people might be able to con shit and be like "Oh this mob will increase my necromancy!" but they would need a group or something to fight it, with the next highest players nearby might be killing something weaker. Go help that group til they can help you. Going level-less seems pretty... intuitive, actually.

As to the idea of solo content:
it has to exist. But, and I state this everytime I bring it up, it has to be inferior in all respects to group required content. Not group "recommended" content (shit that necros can solo in original EQ, for example) but shit that would basically fuck up a single dude for even attempting it at the intended level. Lguk, for example, would be a group zone intended for people whose aggregate skill level averages would be 85-90+% of the skill caps for the game (using Vanilla as a guide) while, lets say, Sol B would be a group recommended zone with soloable content at the entrance for someone in the 85-90%+ skillcaps. The camps/mobs further in would be pretty rough but doable by a highly skilled and really active player, but a group would eat them up and their loot would be better than the shit the entrance mobs drop but not as good as the shit from guk. The skillcaps of soloable content could be set to smaller ranges, so that people who solo would need to travel more than people who group and kill appropriate mobs. Then you add in rng for stuff and you have a sustainable system that doesn't shut out solo play for some classes entirely, yet still 100% rewards even just pairing up more than solo play at all levels, with full group play 100% better than solo/pair play at all levels and for all types.

Gear fitting into things wouldn't be terribly bad.
Gear has skill requirements. Instead of Plate armor saying "Classes: Bard/Warrior/SK/Paladin/Cleric" it would instead say "Requires 190 Plate Armor skill." This is for non-twink caliber gear. Oh yeah, very light on the no-drop tag, but definitely include the "Lore" tag on some stuff that should be, ya know, lore. Then, for items that would be considered twink caliber, you put the requirements substantially lower, or non-existent, but make the item slightly less powerful than the content around it would dictate. If your Breastplate of Rape requires 190 Plate Armor skill and has +25 to stats, the Breastplate of Twinkage would require 50 Plate Armor skill but have +20 to stats. Or a click/proc/whatever that may not require you to be high level to put the piece on, but the effect doesn't go off til the required skill level is met. Lots of random shit to do with that, and imo would add a bit of flavor. If everything was dropable and everything was equipable by anyone as long as they were the right class, the people who come after the first wave of players wouldn't be playing even close to the same game as those that came before did. Mudflation has a way of fubaring progression styles.

There, some ideas about sandboxifying EQ to sort of theorycraft at what they may do in a similar vein in EQ:N.