Who told u aoc is a pvp game? Go read their site. this game is not a pvp game, it has pvp elements in it and pve elements in it. The pve elements outweigh the pvp side of the game. Just coz they said they are going to put pvp in the game and focusing on it, does not mean aoc is a pvp game.
Um, I think your the one that needs to read up on the game. This is a PvP focused MMOG. While it's not 'overtly' PvP, as in that makes up the vast majority of content, the end game, the focus of guilds, it all centers around large scale PvP.
Not quite true. For the sake of endgame, guilds are essentially given a choice about whether they want to be fighting other players or hiving mobs in the "siege or be sieged" regions. In that sense, the endgame content is split right down the middle between PvE and PvP. They mentioned that the number of PvP guild cities is limited, or more specifically space for them will be but such is not the case for their PvE counterparts, so in the end, there probably will be a greater focus on PvE on average, with the larger, more coordinated guilds dividing their resources and manpower between one of each kind of siege city.
Now, unless current plans have changed since my last update on the subject (which was a while ago admittedly), a PvP server is likely to be quite different, since FFA pvp is not confined to the borderlands.
No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee. Hemingway
I am leaning towards the OP here. When I first saw AOC, it had a lot more neat classes - they had a druid and a stormcaller, as well as the mitra, set, bear shammie priests. They had a Zealot, Halbredier in addition to the warriors. They had waylander, and black lotus assasin or something for rogues. Mage archetype I think was left unotuched. While I understand the announcement to merge some of these classes because it was hard to justify a true role for them in the game, I just thought to myself is this a means to get back on production schedule? Did they promise too much? Honestly, I was excited to try something different - just what skill sets could I have access to as a Halbredier? Would i master polearm weapons? Would a zealot be a fanatical berserker type with some party buffs ? Anyways, at least it is not Fighter, Priest, Mage, Rogue. I can understand it is a lots of work to flesh out professions and keep to the Conan Lore. However, as JFK once said We go to the Moon not because it is easy, but because it is hard.
Note that the classes were merged as much to give each class more variety and possibilities then to justify each class having a true role or use. For example, you now have a class specialization you choose at level 60. Also each class has a light and dark path, which changes to appearance, powers and even gear as you go along these paths.
I'd much rather have 16 focused, fun, content filled and balanced classes then 30 broken, bug filled, light on content, unbalanced ones.
Agreed.
My biggest complaint in World of Warcraft (beyond the graphics, end-game and horrid pvp) is that my buddies level 70 night elf hunter looks exactly like the other 20 standing by him in the Bg ---so much so that I ended up following the wrong guy twice a few nights ago to cap a tower.
I really really really hope the weapons, gear etc is varied enough that not everyone is wielding the same crap at end game all looking like a bunch of clones. Please let us dye gear, let weapons look different even if some have nearly the same stats. Just make me feel unique and I'll play this game for a long time (5+ years on DAOC ) because it reminds me of what DAOC should have been.
Thirty years of gaming experience...not sure if I should be proud of that www.mmoexaminer.blogspot.com
I disagree with the OP 110% This is not a pve game - it's pvp. Balancing large numbers of classes for pvp is a pain, and really shows itself in the community forums where the OP will soon be complaining about his class being under or over powered in relation to other classes. To the OP, Maybe you should plan on playing something else.
It wont matter what class you choose, its a player based combat system anyway.
But i will report anyone that beats me, just to be on the safe side. It could very well be a balancing issue.
didn't read the whole thread so I don't know if this was mentioned, but I think the school of thought is that the feat system is suppose to allow a lot of diversity through out the classes. As such a lot of classes isn't needed.
I'd rather have a only a few "classes" and lots more emphasis on skills, especially if the skills are gained in unique storyline activities.
Skills are much easier to balance, provide more flexible character development, and reward dedicated players. Classes force characters to make decisions about what kind of character they will be. Skills let them tune it.
AOC seems to have the right idea by tying your character development to individualized storyline quests. I can't wait to buy this game.
---------- Isn't it interesting that the same people who laugh at science fiction listen to weather forecasts and economists?
Vanguard has 24 classes. Because of this variety of classes, the developers have spend, and are spending 80% of their resources on rebalancing the classes, for PVE and PVP, and still they manage to fuck up everything. One class, the disciple for example or the bard, is extremely overpowered one moment, the next moment they are next to useless, while another class (cleric) is suddenly whiping the floor with anything. Even with WoW's 9 classes its nearly impossible to create a balance, but Vanguard with its 24 classes is so far from being a balanced game EVEN in PVE, in PVP they will never even get close.
Now take LOTRO, only 7 classes, but every class has its pure role. Now this game is obviously not balanced around PVP, so thats an advantage, but still, having only 7 classes means that every class is welcomed into a group, and every class has a wonderful career ahead in pve and raiding, because the classes are pure and focused. Now this example is purely the PVE perspective, in PVP you simply want as few classes as possible because the more classes, the more the developers have to spend on rebalancing.
For that matter, one could argue that for a completely fair PVP environment there should be only one class. A skill based system is in fact even better than a class based system for PVP.
So to recap.
Many classes is a mess for both PVP and PVE.
Few classes for PVE = every class is important, different and thus needed = better
Few classes for PVP = easier to balance gameplay and PVP, no need to completely overhaul classes every month (example, vanguard, eq2) = better
I think there's enough classes to make the game diverse, fun and challenging. While I was sad to see some of the classes go earlier in development, I think it's all for the best. It will be far more easy to balance the game in it's current form and we'll hopefully end up with a better product for it.
One race I'd like to see added later is the Vaniir(?). Having a playable tribe of viking-style barbarians would satisfy us norse descendants. Berserker style.
"His Odin's men rushed forward without armor, were as mad as dogs or wolves, bit their shields, and were as strong as bears or wild bulls, and killed people at a blow, but neither fire nor iron told upon themselves" - Snorri Sturluson
Comments
Not quite true. For the sake of endgame, guilds are essentially given a choice about whether they want to be fighting other players or hiving mobs in the "siege or be sieged" regions. In that sense, the endgame content is split right down the middle between PvE and PvP. They mentioned that the number of PvP guild cities is limited, or more specifically space for them will be but such is not the case for their PvE counterparts, so in the end, there probably will be a greater focus on PvE on average, with the larger, more coordinated guilds dividing their resources and manpower between one of each kind of siege city.
Now, unless current plans have changed since my last update on the subject (which was a while ago admittedly), a PvP server is likely to be quite different, since FFA pvp is not confined to the borderlands.
No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.
Hemingway
I'd much rather have 16 focused, fun, content filled and balanced classes then 30 broken, bug filled, light on content, unbalanced ones.
Agreed.
My biggest complaint in World of Warcraft (beyond the graphics, end-game and horrid pvp) is that my buddies level 70 night elf hunter looks exactly like the other 20 standing by him in the Bg ---so much so that I ended up following the wrong guy twice a few nights ago to cap a tower.
I really really really hope the weapons, gear etc is varied enough that not everyone is wielding the same crap at end game all looking like a bunch of clones. Please let us dye gear, let weapons look different even if some have nearly the same stats. Just make me feel unique and I'll play this game for a long time (5+ years on DAOC ) because it reminds me of what DAOC should have been.
Thirty years of gaming experience...not sure if I should be proud of that
www.mmoexaminer.blogspot.com
It wont matter what class you choose, its a player based combat system anyway.
But i will report anyone that beats me, just to be on the safe side. It could very well be a balancing issue.
Skills are much easier to balance, provide more flexible character development, and reward dedicated players. Classes force characters to make decisions about what kind of character they will be. Skills let them tune it.
AOC seems to have the right idea by tying your character development to individualized storyline quests. I can't wait to buy this game.
----------
Isn't it interesting that the same people who laugh at science fiction listen to weather forecasts and economists?
An example to show that the OP is wrong.
Vanguard has 24 classes. Because of this variety of classes, the developers have spend, and are spending 80% of their resources on rebalancing the classes, for PVE and PVP, and still they manage to fuck up everything. One class, the disciple for example or the bard, is extremely overpowered one moment, the next moment they are next to useless, while another class (cleric) is suddenly whiping the floor with anything. Even with WoW's 9 classes its nearly impossible to create a balance, but Vanguard with its 24 classes is so far from being a balanced game EVEN in PVE, in PVP they will never even get close.
Now take LOTRO, only 7 classes, but every class has its pure role. Now this game is obviously not balanced around PVP, so thats an advantage, but still, having only 7 classes means that every class is welcomed into a group, and every class has a wonderful career ahead in pve and raiding, because the classes are pure and focused. Now this example is purely the PVE perspective, in PVP you simply want as few classes as possible because the more classes, the more the developers have to spend on rebalancing.
For that matter, one could argue that for a completely fair PVP environment there should be only one class. A skill based system is in fact even better than a class based system for PVP.
So to recap.
Many classes is a mess for both PVP and PVE.
Few classes for PVE = every class is important, different and thus needed = better
Few classes for PVP = easier to balance gameplay and PVP, no need to completely overhaul classes every month (example, vanguard, eq2) = better
One race I'd like to see added later is the Vaniir(?). Having a playable tribe of viking-style barbarians would satisfy us norse descendants. Berserker style.