Originally posted by Rydeson Now to deal with the combat issue.. Many love and want "twitch" action combat.. while many (such as myself) enjoy auto targeting.. Here is an OLD working idea.. GIVE PLAYERS THE CHOICE what they want..
There is no real choice. Players will gravitate to the system that poses the least resistance or has advantages in their favor.
An epic "boss" that can just be tag locked instead of having to aim is going to be the only choice in town.
So what do you tell the people that are not good at twitch action combat? There is the door, good bye? I have played with many friends over the years, and it would sadden me to say good bye to friends because of NO CHOICE in combat.. There are some friends that aren't optimal button pushers even with "auto" targeting.. Personally I think the penalty for restricting combat to twitch action isn't a good trade off.. but oh well..
As with most activities, you need to meet the minimum requirements to play. You also need to meet the criteria the game is designed for in terms of what it is.
Don't like the graphics - don't have to play.
Don't like the combat - Don't have to play.
Don't like SOE - Don't have to play.
Yada Yada....
There are many other games out there that may well meet the players criteria and while unfortunate, SOE need to make choices and some of those will put players off, but they will likely be the minority. At any point one of their choices doesn't work you can ask for it to be changed but to be honest here is not the place to do it. Landmark and the Landmark forums are.
Basically SOE will make design choices where possible based on what their player base wants through constructive feedback on their forums and where not possible, based on what works best to fit their overall design goals.
Any time an MMO brings a different aspect there is a risk of it being a deal breaker for some players. I really would feel for you if some of your friends wouldn't play because of the reticle combat but I hope they would at least give it a try. Maybe SoE can tweak the targeting where hot boxes were enlarged to make targeting easier. The problem with this is the more you do that the more you lessen the benefit.
The main advantage to having reticle combat, aside from the PvP side of things, is adding another point of difficulty to mobs. Typically all of the difficulty is in the quantitative side of things where as long as you don't stand in the fire it's a matter of efficiency in skill rotation and gear score.
When you have to aim your abilities there are additional things to consider outside of dice rolls. What if the mob has a run speed buff or short burst teleports? What about a huge tentacle monster that has, well, tentacles that take damage whipping around? Now on top of numerical variable you have an additional level of difficulty. This has been sorely needed in MMOs and if it means losing some players that don't like it that's an unfortunate but unavoidable reality.
Originally posted by Rydeson Now to deal with the combat issue.. Many love and want "twitch" action combat.. while many (such as myself) enjoy auto targeting.. Here is an OLD working idea.. GIVE PLAYERS THE CHOICE what they want..
There is no real choice. Players will gravitate to the system that poses the least resistance or has advantages in their favor.
An epic "boss" that can just be tag locked instead of having to aim is going to be the only choice in town.
So what do you tell the people that are not good at twitch action combat? There is the door, good bye? I have played with many friends over the years, and it would sadden me to say good bye to friends because of NO CHOICE in combat.. There are some friends that aren't optimal button pushers even with "auto" targeting.. Personally I think the penalty for restricting combat to twitch action isn't a good trade off.. but oh well..
You could say the exact same thing about non-action based tab target MMOs. Ever since my wife and I got to play action based MMORPGs and RPGs in general (Tera, Neverwinter, ESO, Oblivion, Skyrim, etc ), going back to playing tab target based games like FFXIV have been so boring for us that we quit within the first month. So if you don't do action combat, you alienate people who want it.
Every game isn't going to be for every person. There's absolutely nothing wrong with liking tab-target or turn based combat systems. Nothing at all. People all over the world love them. But there are people all over the world who want action combat as well.
You can't appease both crowds at the same time. You either accept the combat system for what it is or you pick something else. It's not like you don't have other choices when it comes to tab-target based games.
Originally posted by Rydeson Now to deal with the combat issue.. Many love and want "twitch" action combat.. while many (such as myself) enjoy auto targeting.. Here is an OLD working idea.. GIVE PLAYERS THE CHOICE what they want..
There is no real choice. Players will gravitate to the system that poses the least resistance or has advantages in their favor.
An epic "boss" that can just be tag locked instead of having to aim is going to be the only choice in town.
So what do you tell the people that are not good at twitch action combat? There is the door, good bye? I have played with many friends over the years, and it would sadden me to say good bye to friends because of NO CHOICE in combat.. There are some friends that aren't optimal button pushers even with "auto" targeting.. Personally I think the penalty for restricting combat to twitch action isn't a good trade off.. but oh well..
You could say the exact same thing about non-action based tab target MMOs. Ever since my wife and I got to play action based MMORPGs and RPGs in general (Tera, Neverwinter, ESO, Oblivion, Skyrim, etc ), going back to playing tab target based games like FFXIV have been so boring for us that we quit within the first month. So if you don't do action combat, you alienate people who want it.
Every game isn't going to be for every person. There's absolutely nothing wrong with liking tab-target or turn based combat systems. Nothing at all. People all over the world love them. But there are people all over the world who want action combat as well.
You can't appease both crowds at the same time. You either accept the combat system for what it is or you pick something else. It's not like you don't have other choices when it comes to tab-target based games.
You and others missed the WHOLE point of my post.. How is "choice" effecting YOUR PLAY? You think tab targeting is boring.. so... MAKE sure that tab targeting is not "checked" in the preference box under "options"... And for those players that do NOT want twitch and prefer auto targeting, give them the freedom to click that box.. It doesn't effect YOUR play.. Does it? Allowing players the choice between auto target and twitch is just as easy as clicking "hide helm" in graphic options.. LOL
Are you seriously asking for a change to have two different playstyles? That's a development nightmare.
People should give up on the idea that game must be made for everyone. That is not possible. If you don't like action don't play it. If you don't like cartoony don't play it. This game like wildstar is targeting kids and that's fine.
Originally posted by Edli Are you seriously asking for a change to have two different playstyles? That's a development nightmare.
People should give up on the idea that game must be made for everyone. That is not possible. If you don't like action don't play it. If you don't like cartoony don't play it. This game like wildstar is targeting kids and that's fine.
No it isn't.. World of Tanks allows for both twitch and auto targeting.. and GW2 allows for combat preference when it comes to using AE's .. with a simple "click".. It's rather easy actually..
Originally posted by Rydeson Now to deal with the combat issue.. Many love and want "twitch" action combat.. while many (such as myself) enjoy auto targeting.. Here is an OLD working idea.. GIVE PLAYERS THE CHOICE what they want..
There is no real choice. Players will gravitate to the system that poses the least resistance or has advantages in their favor.
An epic "boss" that can just be tag locked instead of having to aim is going to be the only choice in town.
So what do you tell the people that are not good at twitch action combat? There is the door, good bye? I have played with many friends over the years, and it would sadden me to say good bye to friends because of NO CHOICE in combat.. There are some friends that aren't optimal button pushers even with "auto" targeting.. Personally I think the penalty for restricting combat to twitch action isn't a good trade off.. but oh well..
You could say the exact same thing about non-action based tab target MMOs. Ever since my wife and I got to play action based MMORPGs and RPGs in general (Tera, Neverwinter, ESO, Oblivion, Skyrim, etc ), going back to playing tab target based games like FFXIV have been so boring for us that we quit within the first month. So if you don't do action combat, you alienate people who want it.
Every game isn't going to be for every person. There's absolutely nothing wrong with liking tab-target or turn based combat systems. Nothing at all. People all over the world love them. But there are people all over the world who want action combat as well.
You can't appease both crowds at the same time. You either accept the combat system for what it is or you pick something else. It's not like you don't have other choices when it comes to tab-target based games.
You and others missed the WHOLE point of my post.. How is "choice" effecting YOUR PLAY? You think tab targeting is boring.. so... MAKE sure that tab targeting is not "checked" in the preference box under "options"... And for those players that do NOT want twitch and prefer auto targeting, give them the freedom to click that box.. It doesn't effect YOUR play.. Does it? Allowing players the choice between auto target and twitch is just as easy as clicking "hide helm" in graphic options.. LOL
I didn't miss the point. I'm just telling you that different play styles will alienate different people. I wouldn't mind it at all if they had an "option" that could appeal to both, however this isn't always possible and even if they thought it was possible it might have undesired consequences (like everyone checking the tab target box because it's easier to hit targets with it on, even if they prefer action combat).
The bottom line is that they've already picked one type of combat system and that's what they're building. Going a different route would alien different players and appealing to both might not even be possible within the scope of their development.
I'm not ready to write this game off yet, its just still so early in the process, BUT they really need to show the community something a little more "real". There is a huge EQ base out there that is totally turned off by the look and feel of the game. While I understand a new art direction is a fresh way of presenting the game, I just don't get a EQ feel from the videos I've seen.
Action style combat works imo, just look at Tera or GW2. I enjoy the combat in those games and if EQN can reproduce that it will go a long way, even to the purists who love managing 30 skills. But we are def NOT there yet from the looks of the videos.
I'm not ready to write this game off yet, its just still so early in the process, BUT they really need to show the community something a little more "real". There is a huge EQ base out there that is totally turned off by the look and feel of the game. While I understand a new art direction is a fresh way of presenting the game, I just don't get a EQ feel from the videos I've seen.
Action style combat works imo, just look at Tera or GW2. I enjoy the combat in those games and if EQN can reproduce that it will go a long way, even to the purists who love managing 30 skills. But we are def NOT there yet from the looks of the videos.
I agree with your sentiment but I wish you and other people would refrain from using this "They're alienating EQ player-base!" falsehood. Almost all my gaming friends, and myself, were day 1 EQ players and we're all very excited for EQN.
No game can appeal to all players and there is nothing about EQN that you can say "This appeals to EQ vets and this does not". Each gamer is different, regardless of games they played in the past. Nothing says I can't have liked EQ back in 1999 and not enjoy action combat or stylized graphics. Some people like it, some people don't. That's just a fact of life.
But this "EQ vets are being alienated" nonsense needs to stop.
I'm not ready to write this game off yet, its just still so early in the process, BUT they really need to show the community something a little more "real". There is a huge EQ base out there that is totally turned off by the look and feel of the game. While I understand a new art direction is a fresh way of presenting the game, I just don't get a EQ feel from the videos I've seen.
Action style combat works imo, just look at Tera or GW2. I enjoy the combat in those games and if EQN can reproduce that it will go a long way, even to the purists who love managing 30 skills. But we are def NOT there yet from the looks of the videos.
I agree with your sentiment but I wish you and other people would refrain from using this "They're alienating EQ player-base!" falsehood. Almost all my gaming friends, and myself, were day 1 EQ players and we're all very excited for EQN.
No game can appeal to all players and there is nothing about EQN that you can say "This appeals to EQ vets and this does not". Each gamer is different, regardless of games they played in the past. Nothing says I can't have liked EQ back in 1999 and not enjoy action combat or stylized graphics. Some people like it, some people don't. That's just a fact of life.
But this "EQ vets are being alienated" nonsense needs to stop.
I"m curious to see your list of "similarities" and "differences" between EQ1 and EQN , since you seem to think they are more alike then not.. Combat is completely different right? Defining roles like kiting or charming not available? What about languages? What about character maintenance such as weight encumbrance, food and drink? Will there be tracking? And can we levitate and walk/run from one hill top to another? My list can go on and on.. What about yours?
I'm not ready to write this game off yet, its just still so early in the process, BUT they really need to show the community something a little more "real". There is a huge EQ base out there that is totally turned off by the look and feel of the game. While I understand a new art direction is a fresh way of presenting the game, I just don't get a EQ feel from the videos I've seen.
Action style combat works imo, just look at Tera or GW2. I enjoy the combat in those games and if EQN can reproduce that it will go a long way, even to the purists who love managing 30 skills. But we are def NOT there yet from the looks of the videos.
I agree with your sentiment but I wish you and other people would refrain from using this "They're alienating EQ player-base!" falsehood. Almost all my gaming friends, and myself, were day 1 EQ players and we're all very excited for EQN.
No game can appeal to all players and there is nothing about EQN that you can say "This appeals to EQ vets and this does not". Each gamer is different, regardless of games they played in the past. Nothing says I can't have liked EQ back in 1999 and not enjoy action combat or stylized graphics. Some people like it, some people don't. That's just a fact of life.
But this "EQ vets are being alienated" nonsense needs to stop.
I"m curious to see your list of "similarities" and "differences" between EQ1 and EQN , since you seem to think they are more alike then not.. Combat is completely different right? Defining roles like kiting or charming not available? What about languages? What about character maintenance such as weight encumbrance, food and drink? Will there be tracking? And can we levitate and walk/run from one hill top to another? My list can go on and on.. What about yours?
There can be players who enjoyed EQ excited for EQN without demanding EQ 2.0, I believe that was his point. If SoE is able to pull off what they are framing I imagine at least most "EQ vets" will play it. Why? Because if they played EQ in its heyday they have most likely been around MMOs a long time and what SoE is proposing is a step ahead. The main step ahead is in the way the world looks and feels. This was one of EQ's best traits IMO along with cooperative advancement.
I respect that you have a list of specific wants for an EverQuest MMO but does it have to be exactly the same? If it can illicit a similar feeling or arrive at the same end result is that adequate? For example, community interaction. It was proposed in the SB video that if the Dryads, nature aligned, were pushed out of an area the only way they could return is if enough players who had nature influence were to band together and complete some goal. They keep repeating "community based MMO" and that may just be a term but they may have other vehicles to accomplish it.
Trust me, I have my own list of wants that are similar to what EQ had. An abundance of group content, a focus on CC (which is shown in the video to be the case) /general roles and a very large world to explore. Other than the group/difficult content EQN seems to have that feeling.
I'm not ready to write this game off yet, its just still so early in the process, BUT they really need to show the community something a little more "real". There is a huge EQ base out there that is totally turned off by the look and feel of the game. While I understand a new art direction is a fresh way of presenting the game, I just don't get a EQ feel from the videos I've seen.
Action style combat works imo, just look at Tera or GW2. I enjoy the combat in those games and if EQN can reproduce that it will go a long way, even to the purists who love managing 30 skills. But we are def NOT there yet from the looks of the videos.
I agree with your sentiment but I wish you and other people would refrain from using this "They're alienating EQ player-base!" falsehood. Almost all my gaming friends, and myself, were day 1 EQ players and we're all very excited for EQN.
No game can appeal to all players and there is nothing about EQN that you can say "This appeals to EQ vets and this does not". Each gamer is different, regardless of games they played in the past. Nothing says I can't have liked EQ back in 1999 and not enjoy action combat or stylized graphics. Some people like it, some people don't. That's just a fact of life.
But this "EQ vets are being alienated" nonsense needs to stop.
I"m curious to see your list of "similarities" and "differences" between EQ1 and EQN , since you seem to think they are more alike then not.. Combat is completely different right? Defining roles like kiting or charming not available? What about languages? What about character maintenance such as weight encumbrance, food and drink? Will there be tracking? And can we levitate and walk/run from one hill top to another? My list can go on and on.. What about yours?
Aelious gets it. But I could draw similarities.
Combat is action based on the controls but they're going to have classic roles and hybrid builds, just like EQ had. It's just the same idea done in a more modern way. No one said yet that there isn't going to be charming or kiting and the devs have made it very clear that players will be able to pick from 40 different classes and customize their character's builds. I'm not sure why you wouldn't be excited for EQN's combat. A modern take on RPG combat with original EQ roles like CC and support? What more do you want?
Languages I'm not sure about. I heard they're not going to have it and I don't blame them. With integrated VOIP I think it would be kind of a waste between player-to-player and "practicing languages" in EQ was kinda goofy imho. I wouldn't be against it, but I wouldn't get excited if they announced it was going to have it.
No one said that encumbrance, food or drink wasn't going to be a part of the game. I could totally see food/drink making it in and they'll probably have a really deep crafting class dedicated to it. I'm not really thrilled about encumbrance. Limited Bag slots are good enough imho. Encumbrance in original EQ was just a pain in the ass thing monks had to deal with that had nearly zero negative effect on other classes outside of being forced to walk from carrying too many coppers. It's just a tiny detail that I wouldn't care either way about, but I don't think it added anything to EQ other than headaches to deal with while playing a monk.
I dunno, will there be tracking? Did they tell you there wouldn't be? There's a whole skill category dedicated to utility skills. Things like tracking, levitate, invis, see invis, invis to undead, SoW, Clarity and other things are probably going to make it into the game in some way or another if that's any indication. There's probably going to be about 20-25% of all the skills in the entire game dedicated to Utility. That sounds very EQ-esk to me.
But the main point is that EQN is offering up a perfect storm of features that have been lacking in almost all major MMORPG releases. EQ to me was about the adventure and socializing with people. Exploring a rich world. EQN is offering that in spades better than anything else out there or coming out.
Horizontal progression alone will make the game a free-roaming experience that we haven't even seen from another major MMORPG before. Top it off with things like a the Emergent AI system, a gear system based around horizontal progression and character customization, not being locked into a single class for my entire life, very impressive facial animations, a modern combat system that relies heavily on skill and good character building, and a ton of other features that look great, I see no reason why an EQ vet wouldn't be excited for EQN.
EQ stood for innovation. It was new and nothing like it had ever been done before. If EQN was just EQ1.5 with updated graphics, it might have been neat, but it would have just been another "me too" mmorpg. I'm glad to see they're willing to try something fresh and new. Goodness knows this industry is in desperate need of something new. No one can deny that.
Alpha is where core features survive or die - and we're not there yet.
Actually, Alpha marks the start of the testing / bug correction phase. The features that have survived up until alpha are most likely going to be in the game/software at launch. Alpha is where those features are heavily tested by professional testers or to outside parties so that bugs can be annotated and then cleaned up. You can technically cut features before alpha, during alpha, during beta, or even after release if you need to. But generally production, pre-alpha is where features survive or die. Alpha/beta are for testing and polishing the features the game has retained during production.
All the discussion about EQN at this point are *hopes* - which is fine, just as long as they're not presented as FACTS.
That's what' I've been saying this entire time.
There are some things that can be said for fact right now about EQN even without the game in our hands. Some things can not.
Aelious gets it. But I could draw similarities. Then do it..
Both are MMORPGs, based in EQverse with some lore similarities, while not identical also share races - classes - items - NPC & names - world itself. Open world design, although EQ wasn't as open as EQN appears to sound. Less focus on the individual player being the "hero" of the world and more of an adventurer in it.
Combat is action based on the controls but they're going to have classic roles and hybrid builds, just like EQ had. It's just the same idea done in a more modern way. There is NOTHING similar to EQ's role defining tab targeting and EQN's action twitch.. PLEASE.. Lets stay on Earth.. TY..
Tab targeting = roles? Offense/Defense/Support seem more like roles and both have some variation of these. One simply requires more from players. We don't know the specifics about how any of these will work or if we'll see a come back of CC and what not, but with 40+ classes, I'm assuming they can get creative. Or not. Time will tell.
Languages I'm not sure about. What does VOIP have anything to do with in-game languages like Elvish and Human, or Ogre..
I'm guessing there will be plenty of time-sink walls we'll have to deal with.
I think encumbrance rocked.. It opened up a WHOLE new class to play.. BANKER.. I made tons of easy plat playing banker in many zones.. I take it you want easy mode then? Are you in favor of instant travel too?
I'm in favor of having a fun experience. "Easy mode" and other buzzwords/phrases don't mean much. I could go "What you don't want permadeath? OMG you are such a carebear easymoder" We all have different amounts of energy/money/time to invest in games. If they can provide a fun and challenging experience for as many types of players as possible, I'll be happy. If you personally can't find a way to make a profit off of a game mechanic, sorry I guess. I'm not a huge fan of limitless bags or a teleport every 5 feet, but all things have merit depending on the overall game's design.
I dunno, will there be tracking? Did they tell you there wouldn't be? There's a whole skill category dedicated to utility skills. Things like tracking, levitate, invis, see invis, invis to undead, SoW, Clarity and other things are probably going to make it into the game in some way or another if that's any indication. There's probably going to be about 20-25% of all the skills in the entire game dedicated to Utility. That sounds very EQ-esk to me. That is ALL guess work on your part.. Devs never said a thing about what you just talked about..
At this point we are all guessing on a good deal of it. I'm assuming that many of EQ/EQ2's iconic things will make it in though. Hard to think of SOW not being in an EQ game.
But the main point is that EQN is offering up a perfect storm of features that have been lacking in almost all major MMORPG releases. EQ to me was about the adventure and socializing with people. Exploring a rich world. EQN is offering that in spades better than anything else out there or coming out....EQ stood for innovation. It was new and nothing like it had ever been done before.
For me as well. I don't believe any other game (besides MUDs) have giving me that feeling of being on an adventure. I guess for me I'm a gamer first and a mechanic/system fan second. I'm a fan of EQ and what it was to me, not corpse runs, mindless grinding/camping, vertical progression, having to pick 1 class forever, etc. It was the feeling of being in a virtual world. All those mechanics added to that, but weren't what made it for me. EQN has the potential to do this again. Could also be a train wreck. It's a chance I'm willing to take.
I see no reason why an EQ vet wouldn't be excited for EQN.
They are grumpy old people that simply can't think or play outside their box. If a game isn't designed a certain way (usually specifically for them), then it is just bad news. I pity them. We all have our preferences, but if it is clear that a game doesn't cater to those, why stick around being negative. Move on, find something else that fits. I loved EQ in 99 and I'm sure I'll enjoy EQN just the same if not more (lots I didn't like about EQ).
If people put themselves in a box and slap "EQ Vet" or "Oldschool" on themselves, too bad for them. I've been online gaming for almost 2 decades and while my priorities aren't the same, I still love gaming as a whole. Be it PC, console, phone/tablet, whatever. Seems some are mad that the world caught on to this mmorpg thing and now companies cater to everyone, not just a select few. Adapt or die or in this case, have no games to enjoy.
Is that all you can say about EQN.. Horizontal and Emergent.. If I made a nickel each time you said that, I would be rich.. LOL.. There is ALOT more to a good MMO then just those two things.. Lets wait and see instead of speculating on HOPE and DREAMS..
Can we also wait to stomp on hopes and dreams without any evidence that what they've said won't happen? Have devs hyped things up before and not delivered? Oh so many times. Does that mean it will happen now or always? Nope. If devs says X and I go yay for X and you go X isn't going to happen, one of us is kind of missing the point. It is very simple to dismiss anything, but I personally don't navigate to this forum to go "nope not going to happen, not possible, will suck, lies, hype, yadda yadda." If we can't discuss constructively, what's the point?
WOW.. talk about spin.. This is worse then saying WW1 was just like WW2.. Both wars involved guns and Europe.. I then take it that the Revolutionary War was just like the Civil War.. Both involved guns and United States.. I'm still in disbelief that both of ya'll are saying EQNext's combat is very much like EQ1's.. I"m just baffled.. Do you really expect people to buy into that? I don't even think Dave G could support such a statement..
Oh btw.. there is more to a game then "names".. Sharing the same names and lore does NOT MAKE it so.. We could take WoW and rename Stormwind to Qeynos, and Ironforge to Freeport, etc etc.. and guess what.. It would still be WoW.. I don't even call EQ2 as a true sequel.. Playing rats and butterflies as characters was just too much..
The funniest part had to be where you accused me of baseless ramblings because I do NOT buy into the unproven hype of the game.. Really? So you can speculate all you want what you THINK the game will play like, and that is ok.. but if someone such as myself doubts it.. We are rambling.. Pot meet kettle.. lol
WOW.. talk about spin.. This is worse then saying WW1 was just like WW2.. Both wars involved guns and Europe.. I then take it that the Revolutionary War was just like the Civil War.. Both involved guns and United States.. I'm still in disbelief that both of ya'll are saying EQNext's combat is very much like EQ1's.. I"m just baffled.. Do you really expect people to buy into that? I don't even think Dave G could support such a statement..
I think the general feel of combat will be very different but some "nuts and bolts" will be similar. The targeting and speed of combat are complete polar opposites as EQ is tab, EQN reticle. EQ had a very slow pace of attack in combat while EQN looks to be faster paced with a lot of twitch.
What they do seem to share is the limited skills available at one time and focus on control. I played a Paladin in EQ so I didn't change my skills around very often but I believe other classes did. This will be done to an extreme with EQN, as they state, with a mixing of secondary abilities to fit a situation or play style. Doubly so for what gear someone chooses. In regards to control most of the classes in the video had some form of control whether that be buffing or hindering movement.
What has been partially shown in the class video but also said by the developers is they want each class to "feel" distinct. That can mean a lot of things but I hope it also means the roles that each class can play. The Warrior in the unveiling last year had abilities that would allow them to be a "tank" in keeping enemies away in real time without the use of taunts. The same could be said for the Elementalist having a CC role from what was shown as well as the Cleric in healing health/shields. In EQ your role was vitally important and I hope that EQN has content challenging enough to need people to be good at what their "role" is, even if one player can switch to another class.
The combat in EQN will feel very different but hopefully it will have the "spirit" that made EQ's combat both challenging and rewarding.
WOW.. talk about spin.. This is worse then saying WW1 was just like WW2.. Both wars involved guns and Europe.. I then take it that the Revolutionary War was just like the Civil War.. Both involved guns and United States.. I'm still in disbelief that both of ya'll are saying EQNext's combat is very much like EQ1's.. I"m just baffled.. Do you really expect people to buy into that? I don't even think Dave G could support such a statement..
I think the general feel of combat will be very different but some "nuts and bolts" will be similar. The targeting and speed of combat are complete polar opposites as EQ is tab, EQN reticle. EQ had a very slow pace of attack in combat while EQN looks to be faster paced with a lot of twitch.
What they do seem to share is the limited skills available at one time and focus on control. I played a Paladin in EQ so I didn't change my skills around very often but I believe other classes did. This will be done to an extreme with EQN, as they state, with a mixing of secondary abilities to fit a situation or play style. Doubly so for what gear someone chooses. In regards to control most of the classes in the video had some form of control whether that be buffing or hindering movement.
What has been partially shown in the class video but also said by the developers is they want each class to "feel" distinct. That can mean a lot of things but I hope it also means the roles that each class can play. The Warrior in the unveiling last year had abilities that would allow them to be a "tank" in keeping enemies away in real time without the use of taunts. The same could be said for the Elementalist having a CC role from what was shown as well as the Cleric in healing health/shields. In EQ your role was vitally important and I hope that EQN has content challenging enough to need people to be good at what their "role" is, even if one player can switch to another class.
The combat in EQN will feel very different but hopefully it will have the "spirit" that made EQ's combat both challenging and rewarding.
Have you played GW2? I asked that because EQN's combat will be more like GW2, then EQ1.. I wouldn't go as far to say that GW2 combat is similar to EQ1's, so why say EQN is? As for the distinct feel, I doubt that.. Everything I have seen so far indicates they are going to GW2 active combat setting, even for support roles.. Since the combat will be fast paced, that eliminates many of your skill options.. DOTing for example only works when fights take longer then seconds.. I hated playing my warlock in WoW in a group setting at times.. I couldn't even cast my 2nd spell before the mob was dead.. LOL
And since GW2's combat closely resembles EQN's concept, I don't see illusions, charming and kiting being an option.. Especially if EQN wants to promote PvP.. It's why Blizzard had to nerf much of the "control" abilities of classes in PvP.. You can't priest mind controlling one player after another and making them jump off cliffs.. Just as you can't have warlocks fear kiting another player with no risk.. BUT.. Blizzard loved rogues and stun-locking .. LOL.. There is a lot not yet talked about, especially twitch action combat and skills.. If I have to wait on a 10 second cooldown because my first attempt missed the target, it won't take long before players say, "screw this" and quit..
IMO twitch action combat is VERY NICHE, and it's not appealing to the masses.. The only time I see twitch action really show any signs of success are Esport (pvp) type games.. Generally speaking.. I further doubt EQN is going to allow or expect "vital" roles.. In fact they made it very clear they wanted to avoid any "need class" roles in the game.. Welcome to zergville..
WOW.. talk about spin.. This is worse then saying WW1 was just like WW2.. Both wars involved guns and Europe.. I then take it that the Revolutionary War was just like the Civil War.. Both involved guns and United States.. I'm still in disbelief that both of ya'll are saying EQNext's combat is very much like EQ1's.. I"m just baffled.. Do you really expect people to buy into that? I don't even think Dave G could support such a statement..
I think the general feel of combat will be very different but some "nuts and bolts" will be similar. The targeting and speed of combat are complete polar opposites as EQ is tab, EQN reticle. EQ had a very slow pace of attack in combat while EQN looks to be faster paced with a lot of twitch.
What they do seem to share is the limited skills available at one time and focus on control. I played a Paladin in EQ so I didn't change my skills around very often but I believe other classes did. This will be done to an extreme with EQN, as they state, with a mixing of secondary abilities to fit a situation or play style. Doubly so for what gear someone chooses. In regards to control most of the classes in the video had some form of control whether that be buffing or hindering movement.
What has been partially shown in the class video but also said by the developers is they want each class to "feel" distinct. That can mean a lot of things but I hope it also means the roles that each class can play. The Warrior in the unveiling last year had abilities that would allow them to be a "tank" in keeping enemies away in real time without the use of taunts. The same could be said for the Elementalist having a CC role from what was shown as well as the Cleric in healing health/shields. In EQ your role was vitally important and I hope that EQN has content challenging enough to need people to be good at what their "role" is, even if one player can switch to another class.
The combat in EQN will feel very different but hopefully it will have the "spirit" that made EQ's combat both challenging and rewarding.
Have you played GW2? I asked that because EQN's combat will be more like GW2, then EQ1.. I wouldn't go as far to say that GW2 combat is similar to EQ1's, so why say EQN is? As for the distinct feel, I doubt that.. Everything I have seen so far indicates they are going to GW2 active combat setting, even for support roles.. Since the combat will be fast paced, that eliminates many of your skill options.. DOTing for example only works when fights take longer then seconds.. I hated playing my warlock in WoW in a group setting at times.. I couldn't even cast my 2nd spell before the mob was dead.. LOL
And since GW2's combat closely resembles EQN's concept, I don't see illusions, charming and kiting being an option.. Especially if EQN wants to promote PvP.. It's why Blizzard had to nerf much of the "control" abilities of classes in PvP.. You can't priest mind controlling one player after another and making them jump off cliffs.. Just as you can't have warlocks fear kiting another player with no risk.. BUT.. Blizzard loved rogues and stun-locking .. LOL.. There is a lot not yet talked about, especially twitch action combat and skills.. If I have to wait on a 10 second cooldown because my first attempt missed the target, it won't take long before players say, "screw this" and quit..
IMO twitch action combat is VERY NICHE, and it's not appealing to the masses.. The only time I see twitch action really show any signs of success are Esport (pvp) type games.. Generally speaking.. I further doubt EQN is going to allow or expect "vital" roles.. In fact they made it very clear they wanted to avoid any "need class" roles in the game.. Welcome to zergville..
EQN's combat doesn't look to be like GW2 as EQN is reticle based and GW2 is not. There is a big difference there. Plus, the length of battle does not have to be less just because it is twitch/action. The PvP match between the devs at SoE Live lasted quite a while actually and they were all in one area pelting each other the entire time. This has an effect on how viable effects like kiting or charming is as well. From what we have seen in class abilities CC will be very prominent, you can't deny that if you've seen the videos. I think they've shown four classes in action so far which leaves 36 still to be presented. I'll go out on a limb and say charming or kiting will be part of some classes skillset.
Will it be just like EQ? No but that wasn't my point. It's that some elements will be familiar and how player skill will be weighed as much as the class they are playing.
Note about twitch combat being niche: I think you mean twitch action combat in MMOs, which is itself a niche market in video games. In this case only a handful of titles have reticle combat and of those most, if not all, have animation locks. Whether it will be appealing to the masses has yet to be seen. You want to doubt while I hope which is fine as long as we are playing by the same rules in honestly looking at what we've been shown.
EQN's combat doesn't look to be like GW2 as EQN is reticle based and GW2 is not. Did you really just say that? Because of a reticle you claim the two are not similar, then in that case World of Tanks is exactly like EQN because they both have reticles.. lol There is a big difference there. Plus, the length of battle does not have to be less just because it is twitch/action. I NEVER SAID THAT.. I said that short battles effect various combat roles.. BIG DIFFERENCE.. The PvP match between the devs at SoE Live lasted quite a while actually and they were all in one area pelting each other the entire time. We don't know that.. did you see a UI? They could of spent half their time MISSING each other.. See how that works? This has an effect on how viable effects like kiting or charming is as well. NO it doesn't From what we have seen in class abilities CC will be very prominent, you can't deny that if you've seen the videos. Seriously dude? Because you can chill the ground to slow down movement is NOT CROWD CONTROL.. I suggest you go play an EQ Enchanter, Druid or Bard and learn what real CC is.. Even WoW's CC is better then what I"ve seen so far from EQN.. I think they've shown four classes in action so far which leaves 36 still to be presented. I'll go out on a limb and say charming or kiting will be part of some classes skillset. And I say I doubt that.. As we used to say in EQ (as a druid).. "If I can snare it, I own it".. Trust me a class like a druid, bard, or enchanter in EQN would be too OP.. I seriously doubt that SOE devs are going to allow one player to mez another for MINUTES on end..
Will it be just like EQ? No but that wasn't my point. It's that some elements will be familiar and how player skill will be weighed as much as the class they are playing. Which elements tho? pros vs cons.. Just because they both use swords and shields doesn't mean they are similar.. Right?
Note about twitch combat being niche: I think you mean twitch action combat in MMOs, please don't add words into what I said to JUSTIFY a strawman argument on your end.. TY.. which is itself a niche market in video games. In this case only a handful of titles have reticle combat and of those most, if not all, have animation locks. Whether it will be appealing to the masses has yet to be seen. You want to doubt while I hope which is fine as long as we are playing by the same rules in honestly looking at what we've been shown.
EQN's combat doesn't look to be like GW2 as EQN is reticle based and GW2 is not. Did you really just say that? Because of a reticle you claim the two are not similar, then in that case World of Tanks is exactly like EQN because they both have reticles.. lol There is a big difference there. Plus, the length of battle does not have to be less just because it is twitch/action. I NEVER SAID THAT.. I said that short battles effect various combat roles.. BIG DIFFERENCE.. The PvP match between the devs at SoE Live lasted quite a while actually and they were all in one area pelting each other the entire time. We don't know that.. did you see a UI? They could of spent half their time MISSING each other.. See how that works? This has an effect on how viable effects like kiting or charming is as well. NO it doesn't From what we have seen in class abilities CC will be very prominent, you can't deny that if you've seen the videos. Seriously dude? Because you can chill the ground to slow down movement is NOT CROWD CONTROL.. I suggest you go play an EQ Enchanter, Druid or Bard and learn what real CC is.. Even WoW's CC is better then what I"ve seen so far from EQN.. I think they've shown four classes in action so far which leaves 36 still to be presented. I'll go out on a limb and say charming or kiting will be part of some classes skillset. And I say I doubt that.. As we used to say in EQ (as a druid).. "If I can snare it, I own it".. Trust me a class like a druid, bard, or enchanter in EQN would be too OP.. I seriously doubt that SOE devs are going to allow one player to mez another for MINUTES on end..
Will it be just like EQ? No but that wasn't my point. It's that some elements will be familiar and how player skill will be weighed as much as the class they are playing. Which elements tho? pros vs cons.. Just because they both use swords and shields doesn't mean they are similar.. Right?
Note about twitch combat being niche: I think you mean twitch action combat in MMOs, please don't add words into what I said to JUSTIFY a strawman argument on your end.. TY.. which is itself a niche market in video games. In this case only a handful of titles have reticle combat and of those most, if not all, have animation locks. Whether it will be appealing to the masses has yet to be seen. You want to doubt while I hope which is fine as long as we are playing by the same rules in honestly looking at what we've been shown.
I added the "MMO" because that was the only way to justify what you said about twitch combat being niche. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt but I was aparently wrong. Even though I am excited and have high hopes for EQN in my arguments I try to keep as close to what is shown as I can. You seem to want to go on tangents about GW2, WoW, ESports and backlink them to assumptions about EQN as a basis of argument. I can't have a reaonable discussion like that.
In fairness I will address the reticle comment. GW2 is a hybrid tab target directional combat system while EQN, as it stands now, is fully reticle targetting. The method of targetting plays a big role in how combat feels on top of the specific skills you use. Compare it to whatever game you want my comment stands. I think those that make GW2 comparisons will be wrong about it being like EQN. I think this will have to do more with how the aimed combat paired with the abilities plays overall. The first glimpse, though a very small one, will be when Landmark combat comes. Ironically I think each of the three weapons' two abilities has a control effect associated with it .
I wish you luck in your future EQN forum endeavors
You know.. there would be one way to avoid all this speculation of what combat will be like.. Considering that many fans of EQN are claiming the game is close to done.. The game is suppose to have 40 classes.. OK, That sounds like a lot, and I would hate for SOE to show their entire hand, but lets see 8 of the starting classes and ALL THEIR SKILLS (spells) and detailed explanations of what they do.. similar to this >> http://everquest.allakhazam.com/db/spelllist.html?name=&type=clr&level=10&opt=And+Lower&action=search Let me sink my teeth into something substantial.. I further would like to see some form of UI as well.. Is that asking too much?
The game is exactly how I said it would be 2 years ago,for which I received a warning /sigh and there is no UI shown for the simple reason it is minimalistic 1 hot bar 5 attack.
Comments
As with most activities, you need to meet the minimum requirements to play. You also need to meet the criteria the game is designed for in terms of what it is.
Don't like the graphics - don't have to play.
Don't like the combat - Don't have to play.
Don't like SOE - Don't have to play.
Yada Yada....
There are many other games out there that may well meet the players criteria and while unfortunate, SOE need to make choices and some of those will put players off, but they will likely be the minority. At any point one of their choices doesn't work you can ask for it to be changed but to be honest here is not the place to do it. Landmark and the Landmark forums are.
Basically SOE will make design choices where possible based on what their player base wants through constructive feedback on their forums and where not possible, based on what works best to fit their overall design goals.
Any time an MMO brings a different aspect there is a risk of it being a deal breaker for some players. I really would feel for you if some of your friends wouldn't play because of the reticle combat but I hope they would at least give it a try. Maybe SoE can tweak the targeting where hot boxes were enlarged to make targeting easier. The problem with this is the more you do that the more you lessen the benefit.
The main advantage to having reticle combat, aside from the PvP side of things, is adding another point of difficulty to mobs. Typically all of the difficulty is in the quantitative side of things where as long as you don't stand in the fire it's a matter of efficiency in skill rotation and gear score.
When you have to aim your abilities there are additional things to consider outside of dice rolls. What if the mob has a run speed buff or short burst teleports? What about a huge tentacle monster that has, well, tentacles that take damage whipping around? Now on top of numerical variable you have an additional level of difficulty. This has been sorely needed in MMOs and if it means losing some players that don't like it that's an unfortunate but unavoidable reality.
You could say the exact same thing about non-action based tab target MMOs. Ever since my wife and I got to play action based MMORPGs and RPGs in general (Tera, Neverwinter, ESO, Oblivion, Skyrim, etc ), going back to playing tab target based games like FFXIV have been so boring for us that we quit within the first month. So if you don't do action combat, you alienate people who want it.
Every game isn't going to be for every person. There's absolutely nothing wrong with liking tab-target or turn based combat systems. Nothing at all. People all over the world love them. But there are people all over the world who want action combat as well.
You can't appease both crowds at the same time. You either accept the combat system for what it is or you pick something else. It's not like you don't have other choices when it comes to tab-target based games.
Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL
You and others missed the WHOLE point of my post.. How is "choice" effecting YOUR PLAY? You think tab targeting is boring.. so... MAKE sure that tab targeting is not "checked" in the preference box under "options"... And for those players that do NOT want twitch and prefer auto targeting, give them the freedom to click that box.. It doesn't effect YOUR play.. Does it? Allowing players the choice between auto target and twitch is just as easy as clicking "hide helm" in graphic options.. LOL
People should give up on the idea that game must be made for everyone. That is not possible. If you don't like action don't play it. If you don't like cartoony don't play it. This game like wildstar is targeting kids and that's fine.
How come you can't edit your post on the mobile version of this website. Or even quote.
No it isn't.. World of Tanks allows for both twitch and auto targeting.. and GW2 allows for combat preference when it comes to using AE's .. with a simple "click".. It's rather easy actually..
I didn't miss the point. I'm just telling you that different play styles will alienate different people. I wouldn't mind it at all if they had an "option" that could appeal to both, however this isn't always possible and even if they thought it was possible it might have undesired consequences (like everyone checking the tab target box because it's easier to hit targets with it on, even if they prefer action combat).
The bottom line is that they've already picked one type of combat system and that's what they're building. Going a different route would alien different players and appealing to both might not even be possible within the scope of their development.
Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL
I'm not ready to write this game off yet, its just still so early in the process, BUT they really need to show the community something a little more "real". There is a huge EQ base out there that is totally turned off by the look and feel of the game. While I understand a new art direction is a fresh way of presenting the game, I just don't get a EQ feel from the videos I've seen.
Action style combat works imo, just look at Tera or GW2. I enjoy the combat in those games and if EQN can reproduce that it will go a long way, even to the purists who love managing 30 skills. But we are def NOT there yet from the looks of the videos.
I agree with your sentiment but I wish you and other people would refrain from using this "They're alienating EQ player-base!" falsehood. Almost all my gaming friends, and myself, were day 1 EQ players and we're all very excited for EQN.
No game can appeal to all players and there is nothing about EQN that you can say "This appeals to EQ vets and this does not". Each gamer is different, regardless of games they played in the past. Nothing says I can't have liked EQ back in 1999 and not enjoy action combat or stylized graphics. Some people like it, some people don't. That's just a fact of life.
But this "EQ vets are being alienated" nonsense needs to stop.
Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL
Looks like you better not play a melee class lol...
I don't know, looks pretty bad. Very wow-like.
I"m curious to see your list of "similarities" and "differences" between EQ1 and EQN , since you seem to think they are more alike then not.. Combat is completely different right? Defining roles like kiting or charming not available? What about languages? What about character maintenance such as weight encumbrance, food and drink? Will there be tracking? And can we levitate and walk/run from one hill top to another? My list can go on and on.. What about yours?
There can be players who enjoyed EQ excited for EQN without demanding EQ 2.0, I believe that was his point. If SoE is able to pull off what they are framing I imagine at least most "EQ vets" will play it. Why? Because if they played EQ in its heyday they have most likely been around MMOs a long time and what SoE is proposing is a step ahead. The main step ahead is in the way the world looks and feels. This was one of EQ's best traits IMO along with cooperative advancement.
I respect that you have a list of specific wants for an EverQuest MMO but does it have to be exactly the same? If it can illicit a similar feeling or arrive at the same end result is that adequate? For example, community interaction. It was proposed in the SB video that if the Dryads, nature aligned, were pushed out of an area the only way they could return is if enough players who had nature influence were to band together and complete some goal. They keep repeating "community based MMO" and that may just be a term but they may have other vehicles to accomplish it.
Trust me, I have my own list of wants that are similar to what EQ had. An abundance of group content, a focus on CC (which is shown in the video to be the case) /general roles and a very large world to explore. Other than the group/difficult content EQN seems to have that feeling.
Aelious gets it. But I could draw similarities.
Combat is action based on the controls but they're going to have classic roles and hybrid builds, just like EQ had. It's just the same idea done in a more modern way. No one said yet that there isn't going to be charming or kiting and the devs have made it very clear that players will be able to pick from 40 different classes and customize their character's builds. I'm not sure why you wouldn't be excited for EQN's combat. A modern take on RPG combat with original EQ roles like CC and support? What more do you want?
Languages I'm not sure about. I heard they're not going to have it and I don't blame them. With integrated VOIP I think it would be kind of a waste between player-to-player and "practicing languages" in EQ was kinda goofy imho. I wouldn't be against it, but I wouldn't get excited if they announced it was going to have it.
No one said that encumbrance, food or drink wasn't going to be a part of the game. I could totally see food/drink making it in and they'll probably have a really deep crafting class dedicated to it. I'm not really thrilled about encumbrance. Limited Bag slots are good enough imho. Encumbrance in original EQ was just a pain in the ass thing monks had to deal with that had nearly zero negative effect on other classes outside of being forced to walk from carrying too many coppers. It's just a tiny detail that I wouldn't care either way about, but I don't think it added anything to EQ other than headaches to deal with while playing a monk.
I dunno, will there be tracking? Did they tell you there wouldn't be? There's a whole skill category dedicated to utility skills. Things like tracking, levitate, invis, see invis, invis to undead, SoW, Clarity and other things are probably going to make it into the game in some way or another if that's any indication. There's probably going to be about 20-25% of all the skills in the entire game dedicated to Utility. That sounds very EQ-esk to me.
But the main point is that EQN is offering up a perfect storm of features that have been lacking in almost all major MMORPG releases. EQ to me was about the adventure and socializing with people. Exploring a rich world. EQN is offering that in spades better than anything else out there or coming out.
Horizontal progression alone will make the game a free-roaming experience that we haven't even seen from another major MMORPG before. Top it off with things like a the Emergent AI system, a gear system based around horizontal progression and character customization, not being locked into a single class for my entire life, very impressive facial animations, a modern combat system that relies heavily on skill and good character building, and a ton of other features that look great, I see no reason why an EQ vet wouldn't be excited for EQN.
EQ stood for innovation. It was new and nothing like it had ever been done before. If EQN was just EQ1.5 with updated graphics, it might have been neat, but it would have just been another "me too" mmorpg. I'm glad to see they're willing to try something fresh and new. Goodness knows this industry is in desperate need of something new. No one can deny that.
Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL
Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL
Also please remember, Landmark is effectively the Alpha of EQN too. As Dave Georgeson said, "We are naking EQN right before your eyes, in Landmark".
WOW.. talk about spin.. This is worse then saying WW1 was just like WW2.. Both wars involved guns and Europe.. I then take it that the Revolutionary War was just like the Civil War.. Both involved guns and United States.. I'm still in disbelief that both of ya'll are saying EQNext's combat is very much like EQ1's.. I"m just baffled.. Do you really expect people to buy into that? I don't even think Dave G could support such a statement..
Oh btw.. there is more to a game then "names".. Sharing the same names and lore does NOT MAKE it so.. We could take WoW and rename Stormwind to Qeynos, and Ironforge to Freeport, etc etc.. and guess what.. It would still be WoW.. I don't even call EQ2 as a true sequel.. Playing rats and butterflies as characters was just too much..
The funniest part had to be where you accused me of baseless ramblings because I do NOT buy into the unproven hype of the game.. Really? So you can speculate all you want what you THINK the game will play like, and that is ok.. but if someone such as myself doubts it.. We are rambling.. Pot meet kettle.. lol
I think the general feel of combat will be very different but some "nuts and bolts" will be similar. The targeting and speed of combat are complete polar opposites as EQ is tab, EQN reticle. EQ had a very slow pace of attack in combat while EQN looks to be faster paced with a lot of twitch.
What they do seem to share is the limited skills available at one time and focus on control. I played a Paladin in EQ so I didn't change my skills around very often but I believe other classes did. This will be done to an extreme with EQN, as they state, with a mixing of secondary abilities to fit a situation or play style. Doubly so for what gear someone chooses. In regards to control most of the classes in the video had some form of control whether that be buffing or hindering movement.
What has been partially shown in the class video but also said by the developers is they want each class to "feel" distinct. That can mean a lot of things but I hope it also means the roles that each class can play. The Warrior in the unveiling last year had abilities that would allow them to be a "tank" in keeping enemies away in real time without the use of taunts. The same could be said for the Elementalist having a CC role from what was shown as well as the Cleric in healing health/shields. In EQ your role was vitally important and I hope that EQN has content challenging enough to need people to be good at what their "role" is, even if one player can switch to another class.
The combat in EQN will feel very different but hopefully it will have the "spirit" that made EQ's combat both challenging and rewarding.
Have you played GW2? I asked that because EQN's combat will be more like GW2, then EQ1.. I wouldn't go as far to say that GW2 combat is similar to EQ1's, so why say EQN is? As for the distinct feel, I doubt that.. Everything I have seen so far indicates they are going to GW2 active combat setting, even for support roles.. Since the combat will be fast paced, that eliminates many of your skill options.. DOTing for example only works when fights take longer then seconds.. I hated playing my warlock in WoW in a group setting at times.. I couldn't even cast my 2nd spell before the mob was dead.. LOL
And since GW2's combat closely resembles EQN's concept, I don't see illusions, charming and kiting being an option.. Especially if EQN wants to promote PvP.. It's why Blizzard had to nerf much of the "control" abilities of classes in PvP.. You can't priest mind controlling one player after another and making them jump off cliffs.. Just as you can't have warlocks fear kiting another player with no risk.. BUT.. Blizzard loved rogues and stun-locking .. LOL.. There is a lot not yet talked about, especially twitch action combat and skills.. If I have to wait on a 10 second cooldown because my first attempt missed the target, it won't take long before players say, "screw this" and quit..
IMO twitch action combat is VERY NICHE, and it's not appealing to the masses.. The only time I see twitch action really show any signs of success are Esport (pvp) type games.. Generally speaking.. I further doubt EQN is going to allow or expect "vital" roles.. In fact they made it very clear they wanted to avoid any "need class" roles in the game.. Welcome to zergville..
EQN's combat doesn't look to be like GW2 as EQN is reticle based and GW2 is not. There is a big difference there. Plus, the length of battle does not have to be less just because it is twitch/action. The PvP match between the devs at SoE Live lasted quite a while actually and they were all in one area pelting each other the entire time. This has an effect on how viable effects like kiting or charming is as well. From what we have seen in class abilities CC will be very prominent, you can't deny that if you've seen the videos. I think they've shown four classes in action so far which leaves 36 still to be presented. I'll go out on a limb and say charming or kiting will be part of some classes skillset.
Will it be just like EQ? No but that wasn't my point. It's that some elements will be familiar and how player skill will be weighed as much as the class they are playing.
Note about twitch combat being niche: I think you mean twitch action combat in MMOs, which is itself a niche market in video games. In this case only a handful of titles have reticle combat and of those most, if not all, have animation locks. Whether it will be appealing to the masses has yet to be seen. You want to doubt while I hope which is fine as long as we are playing by the same rules in honestly looking at what we've been shown.
I added the "MMO" because that was the only way to justify what you said about twitch combat being niche. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt but I was aparently wrong. Even though I am excited and have high hopes for EQN in my arguments I try to keep as close to what is shown as I can. You seem to want to go on tangents about GW2, WoW, ESports and backlink them to assumptions about EQN as a basis of argument. I can't have a reaonable discussion like that.
In fairness I will address the reticle comment. GW2 is a hybrid tab target directional combat system while EQN, as it stands now, is fully reticle targetting. The method of targetting plays a big role in how combat feels on top of the specific skills you use. Compare it to whatever game you want my comment stands. I think those that make GW2 comparisons will be wrong about it being like EQN. I think this will have to do more with how the aimed combat paired with the abilities plays overall. The first glimpse, though a very small one, will be when Landmark combat comes. Ironically I think each of the three weapons' two abilities has a control effect associated with it
.
I wish you luck in your future EQN forum endeavors