hmm you guys would like to have almost all classes from start and maybe a new 2 or 3 in the long run, I always find holding classes back more a annoyance, since I don't like to make several chars, and if lets say I like paladins and knights calsses or gunners, they launch only 5 basics classes then in 3 months they make more classes let's say a paladin kind, I would not be that happy to ahve to reroll again.
also if for example I know tey will launch a new class in 3 months after I pretty much would no play till that class is out but by then I can forgot andor be too busy with another game to care to try.
so you guys don't think its better have all classes out now tehn keep making clsses over the time?
I can;t tell you how angry I was when Mythic or EA said they were holding back 4 classes from Warhammer and one of them was the Black Guard.
I almost considered not playing because I don't really like ALTs and like tos tick to my main character is fairly maxed.
The only thing that worries me about fewer classes with very specific roles, very distinct set of skills etc, is that when the time comes to add new classes, is that those new ones might be harder to create, and keep them unique.
Eventually there would have to be more "mirror effect" between realms, although you can have hybrid classes i.e. a new viking hybrid class could end up having the abilities of lets say a tank in arthurians and caster in TDD.
There's only so much you can invent / create as new skills or spells, eventually, they'd have to be mirrored to get new classes.
Just a thought.
The more specific the rolls, the EASIER it is going to be to create new classes......
the more hybridized they are the more they will all seem alike.
I agree, but i mean that there has to be some caution has to how specialisation is looked upon too, how many or what types of skills / spells comes with it etc
Bowbow (kob hunter) Infecto (kob cave shammy) and Thurka (troll warrior) on Merlin/Midgard DAoC Thurka on WAR
Originally posted by Niix_Ozek Blademaster and ranger ***
Thank you!!! I thought it was Blademaster!
Anyway back to the OP!
Expansion classes were released as
Melee Hybrid / Caster Pet class hybrid
yet the Reaver and Savage were NOTHING alike same with the Necro and Bonehunter or Animist. Each had a similar concept of pet/s but each implemented VERY differently.
And I'm sure people remember some dominate Animists/Necros and Bonehunters once people figured out how to play and gear and spec them.
It depends on how you will be able to spec your character. If a tank is only going to revolve around different support/tankish features I think 5 is a bit short. If a "tank" can spec to be the melee dps of a faction then yeah 4 or 5 is fine.
He made it sound like classes will be role specific so that leads me to think the latter example isn't true.
I think we need a tank, mdps, rdps, healer, and a utility (buffer/debuffer). It sounds restricting, but if they do something wierd where the rdps can use staves for spells or a bow for physical damage it gets interesting...
Anyway, like I said... hard to say what is enough when we don't have anything concrete.
hmm you guys would like to have almost all classes from start and maybe a new 2 or 3 in the long run, I always find holding classes back more a annoyance, since I don't like to make several chars, and if lets say I like paladins and knights calsses or gunners, they launch only 5 basics classes then in 3 months they make more classes let's say a paladin kind, I would not be that happy to ahve to reroll again.
also if for example I know tey will launch a new class in 3 months after I pretty much would no play till that class is out but by then I can forgot andor be too busy with another game to care to try.
so you guys don't think its better have all classes out now tehn keep making clsses over the time?
It's a matter of development priorities and making sure the game launches in a reasonable timeframe while still being balanced. Sure, we'd all love to have a larger world, more structures/buildings, more items, more classes. But at some point you need to have realistic launch goals and then keep on improving the game after that. I am totally fine with making sure the core classes at launch are balanced and then adding more over time.
Don't forget we'll also have at least one crafter class.
Originally posted by Zintair IM SO OVER COOKIE CUTTER. One of my most favorite parts about DAOC was how unique each realms classes were. I believe it was the "realm Pride" article that stated how players should feel akin to their realm. Maybe it was some of the comments from players, regardless I believe it to be true. How can you have realm pride when each realm has the same classes albeit with different pixels to show them off. It comes down to p***** in a few players cheerios who can;t handle the fact that they have been beaten. There is always an excuse whether its population, server imbalance, lag, gear or something else these people will find the excuse and exploit it. But you can't develop a game for these people because they are also the ones who leave after 30 days. IMO each realm should have their own set of unique classes that perform their own unique roles. Keep to the trinity and Rock paper scissors but approach it differently for each realm by looking at the lore.A quick example would be having 5 classes, 4 main trinity and a hybrid for each realm.(using old school DAOC names lol)AlbionArmsman / Mercenary / Friar / Wizard / Paladin or ScoutMidgardWarrior / Berserker / Shaman / Runemaster / Savage or ShadowbladeHiberniaHero / Blademaster / Druid / Eldritch / Warden or NightshadeDepending on the realm their hybrid or 5th class would in some way be related to the realm. Maybe a Valkriye for Vikings or another magic user for Hibernia. They would each need to perform a similar role of course whether DPS or off tank etc.Just a few brief examples but each of these classes had their own unique ability/weapons etc and way to perform their role. I do not believe MMOs should stray from this. While mainstream MMOs may not have the development time with PVE/end game etc to deal with a game solely focused on RvR SHOULD be able to balance this. My 2 cents
This^ 100%. It had to come from a Midgard player! All the other Hibis and them Albs arent smart enough
Originally posted by Zintair IM SO OVER COOKIE CUTTER.
One of my most favorite parts about DAOC was how unique each realms classes were. I believe it was the "realm Pride" article that stated how players should feel akin to their realm. Maybe it was some of the comments from players, regardless I believe it to be true.
How can you have realm pride when each realm has the same classes albeit with different pixels to show them off. It comes down to p***** in a few players cheerios who can;t handle the fact that they have been beaten. There is always an excuse whether its population, server imbalance, lag, gear or something else these people will find the excuse and exploit it. But you can't develop a game for these people because they are also the ones who leave after 30 days.
IMO each realm should have their own set of unique classes that perform their own unique roles. Keep to the trinity and Rock paper scissors but approach it differently for each realm by looking at the lore.
A quick example would be having 5 classes, 4 main trinity and a hybrid for each realm.
Depending on the realm their hybrid or 5th class would in some way be related to the realm. Maybe a Valkriye for Vikings or another magic user for Hibernia. They would each need to perform a similar role of course whether DPS or off tank etc.
Just a few brief examples but each of these classes had their own unique ability/weapons etc and way to perform their role. I do not believe MMOs should stray from this. While mainstream MMOs may not have the development time with PVE/end game etc to deal with a game solely focused on RvR SHOULD be able to balance this.
My 2 cents
This^ 100%. It had to come from a Midgard player! All the other Hibis and them Albs arent smart enough
Too busy lagging my screen to let me know they were coming bwahaha! /stealth
Hopefully the class system will be somewhat flexible and not 100% locked into a single role.
I can't tell you how many times in DAoC I wished that I had a main different than my shaman (this was vanilla DAoC before any expansion). I just felt so useless in RvR.
If we have any ability to change roles without having to grind out another toon from level 1, that would be awesome, as I don't have 10 hours to devote a day like I had 10 years ago.
I really like the flexibility of Rifts soul system, you still remain a single class but your role can vary depending on spec.
That would probably be the smart way of doing it as it gives CSE room to develope hybrids as time permits which should dovetail into the increased chaos factor of the CU's theme. I know MJ talks about having to deal with gimping out toons and the downside of RIFT is having to deal with headache of souls trees (logged into my account the other day, my lvl 49 cleric had a respect and I had zero clue what to do with all the new options), but if we could keep the best possible outcome (and still be able to gimp out the toon) that would allow CSE breathing room for a rapid launch. This could be the best option even if it's the one and only one track to follow for that class at launch. As long as the initial track is never allowed to be overshadowed by future tracks/hybrids.
Midranki - To us, Thidranki Faste is not just some center keep, it's our field Guild Hall. Camelot Unchained's Kickstarter - Warrior Forever
To be honest I hope they don't go with Rifts system. On my mage, I can switch from tank to healer to any flavor of dps (pet, dot, sustained dps, burst dps) on the fly. I think it'd be better to focus on a certian aspect and let the player have different ways to attain that role. For example, in DaoC the druid was a healer, you could focus on 100% healing and get awesome heals, or gimp the healing slightly to be a buffer/healer, or pet/healer. No matter which way you chose though, you'd still have the ability to heal and do basic cures (disease/poison)
I healed Mistwraith and all I got was this stupid tee-shirt!
To be honest I hope they don't go with Rifts system. On my mage, I can switch from tank to healer to any flavor of dps (pet, dot, sustained dps, burst dps) on the fly. I think it'd be better to focus on a certian aspect and let the player have different ways to attain that role. For example, in DaoC the druid was a healer, you could focus on 100% healing and get awesome heals, or gimp the healing slightly to be a buffer/healer, or pet/healer. No matter which way you chose though, you'd still have the ability to heal and do basic cures (disease/poison)
RIFT went way overboard and it hurt the game IMO. However, instead of creating new classes in future expansions in CU, having a new spec option might be the best way forward. Sort of the middle ground between DAoC and RIFT. So it would be tank, caster, healer, rogue, and crafter as the five base classes with two or three specs to chose from at launch.
Midranki - To us, Thidranki Faste is not just some center keep, it's our field Guild Hall. Camelot Unchained's Kickstarter - Warrior Forever
4 or 5 classes could work given the right system was implemented. From what I've read you will gain skill by doing things (I.E. swinging a sword or casting spells). Thus you could have 4 base classes (+1 crafter class) and allow the player to choose what they want to do within that class making the abilities and methods of attack define what exactly class the player becomes.
If you think of Daoc's system at launch you have 4 base classes. I was a Hib thus I'll use their classes for example. You had Guardian, Naturalist, Stalker, and Magician. Thus when a player chose Guardian they were limited to specific item set to use until they chose their path of specialization. A hero took a beefy defensive/tank ability set (although could DPS) at the cost of range (not that any tank's ranged attacks were worth worrying about except the Armsman RR5 oh noes!), Blademasters (even though most considered meat shields) specialized in pure face melting melee DPS, and Champions attuned themselves to magic but were still granted access to melee weapons for being on a lower hip point table and being easier to crowd control.
Thus a system similar to this could be used. You pick your class, Guardian/Naturalist/Stalker/Magician, then you are given a large choice of paths to follow. The paths you use define what kind of specific class your character becomes. So if a player chooses guardian they would most likely have access to any and all physical attack paths. This isn't to say they wouldn't have the ability to attuned themselves to magic in some way although it would be bad design if they were as powerful as a specialized Magician due to the amount of armor they might be wearing.
Thus let's say the player chooses Guardian but wants to have the ability to use magic also. Naturally as a Guardian they are going have physical damage weapons equipped but because of their magical attunement they gain access to a path which offers abilities similar to that of the Champion Class in Daoc. The ability to do some magical direct damage along with debuffing targets or buffing themselves becomes paired with the ability to use a sword/shield or even a two handed weapon. Players aren't going to all go the same path thus you might have dual wielding Guardians who debuff their targets to make killing easier. Some players hate magic and would focus solely on stabbing the target's face. It works just as well for the other base classes. If there is CC or Speed paths make them available to at least 2 paths on different base classes. So groups aren't forced to have at least one X and one Y to be competitive. Maybe you want a Naturalist attuned to Nature magic which grants healing and buffs. Perhaps a Magician attuned to Nature magic which can summon FoF shrooms and also give the caster Lifetaps (cough cough!). Stalkers would be the same. Stealth path or trickery for wall climbing, safe fall, and such paired with a choice of Bows/Xbows/Throwing or stab you in the face or back daggers/swords/maces/axes/etc. You could even offer a way for stalkers who don't want to focus on stealth alternative paths such as music maybe and create a bard class.
4 base classes paired with a system such as this would allow for players to basically create their own class. I'm sure there would be specific paths which would be more powerful than others but that falls on the Devs to balance correctly. MJ stated choice is going to matter thus good design would want to restrict certain combinations of Paths. Similar to how mages worked in Baldur's Gate. If you chose to specialize in Evocation spells you lost the ability to cast Enchantment spells. Classes aren't going to be mirrored but will abilities like they were in Daoc? IMO figure out the abilities you want then assign them to paths which belong to classes. Players will figure out the rest.
"Rather than love, than money, than fame, give me truth."
RIFT went way overboard and it hurt the game IMO. However, instead of creating new classes in future expansions in CU, having a new spec option might be the best way forward. Sort of the middle ground between DAoC and RIFT. So it would be tank, caster, healer, rogue, and crafter as the five base classes with two or three specs to chose from at launch.
I agree with you, a middle ground between DAoC and Rift would be perfect. I personally loved the Rift soul system. It was all the other wow-cloned things that led me to quit the game after a couple months. Granted, I agree they went WAY overboard and allowed all classes to be any archetype. But I loved being able to add a dash of bard to my rogue, or a little survivability to my Cleric by adding Justicator. Yes you eventually end up with BiS spec's for each archetype, but the soul system was awesome for people like me that love to tinker with character customization.
RIFT went way overboard and it hurt the game IMO. However, instead of creating new classes in future expansions in CU, having a new spec option might be the best way forward. Sort of the middle ground between DAoC and RIFT. So it would be tank, caster, healer, rogue, and crafter as the five base classes with two or three specs to chose from at launch.
I agree with you, a middle ground between DAoC and Rift would be perfect. I personally loved the Rift soul system. It was all the other wow-cloned things that led me to quit the game after a couple months. Granted, I agree they went WAY overboard and allowed all classes to be any archetype. But I loved being able to add a dash of bard to my rogue, or a little survivability to my Cleric by adding Justicator. Yes you eventually end up with BiS spec's for each archetype, but the soul system was awesome for people like me that love to tinker with character customization.
tinkering was cool, but you didn't feel at all who you are because enemies could be the same classes. Combat was bad because there was almost no interrupts. I almost didn't play rift but i made in calculator specs i would like to play for almost all type of chars lol.
Comments
I can;t tell you how angry I was when Mythic or EA said they were holding back 4 classes from Warhammer and one of them was the Black Guard.
I almost considered not playing because I don't really like ALTs and like tos tick to my main character is fairly maxed.
Needless to say I was very salty.
no, they did not add any classes before SI came out. It was the core classes for each realm.
Albion:
Sorc, Cabby, Friar, Arms, Cleric, Wiz, Scout, Infil, Pally, Minstrel, Thuerg
Hibernia:
Enchanter, Ment, Eld, Hero, Blademaster, Bard, Champ, Ranger, Nighshade, Warden, Druid
Midgard:
Zerker, Healer, Skald, Shadowblade, Hunter, Shaman, Warrior, Spiritmaster, Runemaster, Thane
Armsman/Paladin/Mercenary/Scout/Infiltrator/Wizard/Sorcerer/Thaumatergist/Friar/Cleric/Minstrel/Cabby
Warrior/Thane/Zerker/Hunter/Shadowblade/Runemaster/Spiritmaster/Shaman/Healer/Skald
Hero/Champion/ xxxx /Warden/Eldritch/Mentalist/Enchanter/Druid/Nightshade/Bard
think im missing a few.
First expansion classes were
Albion: Reaver/Necromancer
Hib: Valewalker/Animist
Mid: Bonehunter/Savage
Ozek - DAOC
Niix - Other games that sucked
I agree, but i mean that there has to be some caution has to how specialisation is looked upon too, how many or what types of skills / spells comes with it etc
Bowbow (kob hunter) Infecto (kob cave shammy) and Thurka (troll warrior) on Merlin/Midgard DAoC
Thurka on WAR
Sorry if i got a little off-topic there.
but to get back on it, i'd go with 5 classes
Tank, healer, support, DPS, scout/archers
Bowbow (kob hunter) Infecto (kob cave shammy) and Thurka (troll warrior) on Merlin/Midgard DAoC
Thurka on WAR
Thank you!!! I thought it was Blademaster!
Anyway back to the OP!
Expansion classes were released as
Melee Hybrid / Caster Pet class hybrid
yet the Reaver and Savage were NOTHING alike same with the Necro and Bonehunter or Animist. Each had a similar concept of pet/s but each implemented VERY differently.
And I'm sure people remember some dominate Animists/Necros and Bonehunters once people figured out how to play and gear and spec them.
It depends on how you will be able to spec your character. If a tank is only going to revolve around different support/tankish features I think 5 is a bit short. If a "tank" can spec to be the melee dps of a faction then yeah 4 or 5 is fine.
He made it sound like classes will be role specific so that leads me to think the latter example isn't true.
I think we need a tank, mdps, rdps, healer, and a utility (buffer/debuffer). It sounds restricting, but if they do something wierd where the rdps can use staves for spells or a bow for physical damage it gets interesting...
Anyway, like I said... hard to say what is enough when we don't have anything concrete.
It's a matter of development priorities and making sure the game launches in a reasonable timeframe while still being balanced. Sure, we'd all love to have a larger world, more structures/buildings, more items, more classes. But at some point you need to have realistic launch goals and then keep on improving the game after that. I am totally fine with making sure the core classes at launch are balanced and then adding more over time.
Don't forget we'll also have at least one crafter class.
Heartspark: Animist rr12, bors, Lone Enforcer, Retired
Dranzerk: Berzerker (kay) retired
Dhei: Spiritmaster (Kay) retired
Goblinking : Hunter (Kay) retired
Moongoose: Shadowblade (Kay) retired
This^ 100%. It had to come from a Midgard player! All the other Hibis and them Albs arent smart enough
Too busy lagging my screen to let me know they were coming bwahaha! /stealth
Aspiring Game Musician <<>> Inquiring ears, feel free to visit: http://www.youtube.com/user/vagarylabs
That would probably be the smart way of doing it as it gives CSE room to develope hybrids as time permits which should dovetail into the increased chaos factor of the CU's theme. I know MJ talks about having to deal with gimping out toons and the downside of RIFT is having to deal with headache of souls trees (logged into my account the other day, my lvl 49 cleric had a respect and I had zero clue what to do with all the new options), but if we could keep the best possible outcome (and still be able to gimp out the toon) that would allow CSE breathing room for a rapid launch. This could be the best option even if it's the one and only one track to follow for that class at launch. As long as the initial track is never allowed to be overshadowed by future tracks/hybrids.
Midranki - To us, Thidranki Faste is not just some center keep, it's our field Guild Hall.
Camelot Unchained's Kickstarter - Warrior Forever
I'd be fine with this as a start.....
IF, and only IF they were as functional(some may say as limited) as those classes in daoc
You forgot the blademaster, but don't feel too bad..they weren't even in the game's manual ;D
To be honest I hope they don't go with Rifts system. On my mage, I can switch from tank to healer to any flavor of dps (pet, dot, sustained dps, burst dps) on the fly. I think it'd be better to focus on a certian aspect and let the player have different ways to attain that role. For example, in DaoC the druid was a healer, you could focus on 100% healing and get awesome heals, or gimp the healing slightly to be a buffer/healer, or pet/healer. No matter which way you chose though, you'd still have the ability to heal and do basic cures (disease/poison)
I healed Mistwraith and all I got was this stupid tee-shirt!
http://www.mmorpg.com/blogs/PerfArt
RIFT went way overboard and it hurt the game IMO. However, instead of creating new classes in future expansions in CU, having a new spec option might be the best way forward. Sort of the middle ground between DAoC and RIFT. So it would be tank, caster, healer, rogue, and crafter as the five base classes with two or three specs to chose from at launch.
Midranki - To us, Thidranki Faste is not just some center keep, it's our field Guild Hall.
Camelot Unchained's Kickstarter - Warrior Forever
This was my thought as well. That only leaves 3-4 classes per realm
And why can't I be a Tank/crafter?
Nanulak
Dedicated crafter as a class?
if so, this should be held off....3/4 classes ain't gonna cut it......
we gonna bring the crafter along and distract the enemy with all the baubles he is trying to hawk?
If you think of Daoc's system at launch you have 4 base classes. I was a Hib thus I'll use their classes for example. You had Guardian, Naturalist, Stalker, and Magician. Thus when a player chose Guardian they were limited to specific item set to use until they chose their path of specialization. A hero took a beefy defensive/tank ability set (although could DPS) at the cost of range (not that any tank's ranged attacks were worth worrying about except the Armsman RR5 oh noes!), Blademasters (even though most considered meat shields) specialized in pure face melting melee DPS, and Champions attuned themselves to magic but were still granted access to melee weapons for being on a lower hip point table and being easier to crowd control.
Thus a system similar to this could be used. You pick your class, Guardian/Naturalist/Stalker/Magician, then you are given a large choice of paths to follow. The paths you use define what kind of specific class your character becomes. So if a player chooses guardian they would most likely have access to any and all physical attack paths. This isn't to say they wouldn't have the ability to attuned themselves to magic in some way although it would be bad design if they were as powerful as a specialized Magician due to the amount of armor they might be wearing.
Thus let's say the player chooses Guardian but wants to have the ability to use magic also. Naturally as a Guardian they are going have physical damage weapons equipped but because of their magical attunement they gain access to a path which offers abilities similar to that of the Champion Class in Daoc. The ability to do some magical direct damage along with debuffing targets or buffing themselves becomes paired with the ability to use a sword/shield or even a two handed weapon. Players aren't going to all go the same path thus you might have dual wielding Guardians who debuff their targets to make killing easier. Some players hate magic and would focus solely on stabbing the target's face. It works just as well for the other base classes. If there is CC or Speed paths make them available to at least 2 paths on different base classes. So groups aren't forced to have at least one X and one Y to be competitive. Maybe you want a Naturalist attuned to Nature magic which grants healing and buffs. Perhaps a Magician attuned to Nature magic which can summon FoF shrooms and also give the caster Lifetaps (cough cough!). Stalkers would be the same. Stealth path or trickery for wall climbing, safe fall, and such paired with a choice of Bows/Xbows/Throwing or stab you in the face or back daggers/swords/maces/axes/etc. You could even offer a way for stalkers who don't want to focus on stealth alternative paths such as music maybe and create a bard class.
4 base classes paired with a system such as this would allow for players to basically create their own class. I'm sure there would be specific paths which would be more powerful than others but that falls on the Devs to balance correctly. MJ stated choice is going to matter thus good design would want to restrict certain combinations of Paths. Similar to how mages worked in Baldur's Gate. If you chose to specialize in Evocation spells you lost the ability to cast Enchantment spells. Classes aren't going to be mirrored but will abilities like they were in Daoc? IMO figure out the abilities you want then assign them to paths which belong to classes. Players will figure out the rest.
"Rather than love, than money, than fame, give me truth."
NO mirrored classes.
Racial differentiation.
A good start.
http://www.mmorpg.com/blogs/PerfArt
I agree with you, a middle ground between DAoC and Rift would be perfect. I personally loved the Rift soul system. It was all the other wow-cloned things that led me to quit the game after a couple months. Granted, I agree they went WAY overboard and allowed all classes to be any archetype. But I loved being able to add a dash of bard to my rogue, or a little survivability to my Cleric by adding Justicator. Yes you eventually end up with BiS spec's for each archetype, but the soul system was awesome for people like me that love to tinker with character customization.
tinkering was cool, but you didn't feel at all who you are because enemies could be the same classes. Combat was bad because there was almost no interrupts. I almost didn't play rift but i made in calculator specs i would like to play for almost all type of chars lol.