It is an EQ2 kind of week and I’m really over using the logo here. It is to be expected though with Fan Faire looming and massive changes nipping along at its tail. It is an exciting and frightening time! Why am I excited today? Dave Georgeson put up a blog post about what is coming soon for EQ2. In doing so he said something that I’ve been saying for a while now! He took my advice (because clearly I’m the only one who said this! Only me and my ego)!
And last, (but certainly not least), we intend to release a design overview for what the classes should be, how they should work together…and then execute on that plan.
I have been clamoring for this for quite some time because it really feels like both the players and the developers have lost perspective in class balance and dependency. In EverQuest we were given very clear charts about who did what and to what degree. EverQuest II started off in a very clear fashion and is now quite muddled. We’ve been shoe horned into four classes with minor flare to each. Some classes are too powerful. Some are too weak. Some are just fine but an absolute bore to play.
Many players pawn off class balance as something of little importance these days and I just can’t agree. Class balance can literally change your ability to play and enjoy your MMORPG of choice. If players perceive your class as a waste of space you’ll receive less groups and raid invites. Everyone should have something to offer and if you don’t have a clear vision of what every class does that makes it tough.
Does this mean I’ll get what I want in the templar department? I imagine not but at least I will have a clear vision of what SOE expects me to be. So will other players and that lets everyone make a more informed decision. If this does comes to fruition I say thank you Dave! It is greatly appreciated. We need a new perspective on what we’re suppose to be!
For more details you can check out the full blog post.
All characters are © 2007 - 2012
“Does this mean I’ll get what I want in the templar department? I imagine not but at least I will have a clear vision of what SOE expects me to be. ”
Clerics are free classes, while Druids and Shamen are not. For your sake, I hope that their vision of your class is not “makes the argument that the player should pay to unlock a real healer”.
I agree. I’m skeptical of any game that makes players pay for classes. I’d much rather a game that had the confidence of going “F2P” or “Freemium” by making money off fanity items and content. My skepticism is obviously coming from a similar direction as your’s: the incentive to make the paid classes better than the free ones is perhaps too strong.
Gah — bad night for typing!
Obviously, I meant “vanity,” not “fanity.” lol.
I’m under the impression that paying for a particular class/race is only on the F2P servers. I’ve tried F2P games like Rappelz, and think it’ll mainly be the realm of the kiddies and those who have way more money than time and don’t intent to invest much into a game.
For those of us who play the game regularly, the subscription model will always win. Hopefully SOE recognised this and we’ll get content first with meaningful stuff free.
I think what group and raid invites players get has more to do with stereotypes and the very human characteristic of making a mountain out of a molehill than anything else. Let’s make an example: Class X and Y are both DPS’ers, but class Y generally gets 2-4% better DPS… but that’s just in general. 2-4% DPS would have almost no difference in a group setting and *certainly* no difference in a raid setting, so the player reaction *should* be a shirk. Instead, it’s a “OH NO CLASS Y is TeH SUCK! NO CLASSSSS Y in this Group!!!”
The ironic thing is spending 10-60 minutes more to find class X, as many groups are want to do, is almost certainly going to cost more exp/loot than just taking the first capable player who would fit in with the group.
So, should games strive to have a good class balance? I’d say yes — and I’d especially say yes within the same type of archetype — but it shouldn’t be such an end of the world moment that players will totally eschew someone who plays in the class perceived to be weaker than it should. The differences usually aren’t as stark as we’d all like to think.
(I will go out and say that class balance between two classes that fill different roles is much harder to achieve and even attempting to do so can make the game very, very bland. I *like* the fact that Enchanters in EQ can crappy DPS, etc. For classes that serve different roles, it’s more important to make sure they have some important tool or skill to bring to the table that groups and raids will want than “balance.” Additionally, it’s important that those tools or skills make playing that class damn fun.)
correction: when I said
“OH NO CLASS Y is TeH SUCK! NO CLASSSSS Y in this Group!!!”
I meant to say “ClASSSSS X”
sorry.
I absolutely agree with your premise. I want to point out a few things that I think you over look though. You list a small DPS difference and we do see eye to eye there. In some cases though it is a mountain. Look at assassin DPS vs ranger DPS in EQ2. No matter how much our enlightened balance developer wants us to believe that 98% of rangers are morons and don’t know how and where to stand the delta in damage is extreme. We’re talking 10K+ DPS difference. That isn’t 2 – 4%. In those situations you HAVE to balance.
When it comes for looking for an assassin instead of a ranger you make a good point for groups and pick up raids. Where we get stuck is in stable raid forces. Guilds ARE going to look for assassins in their recruitment and if you have 26 raiders on you’ll take them instead. It only takes a second to sit out a ranger over an assassin in that situation. This is why if you watch raid guilds go into zones you’ll frequently find a brawler standing outside alone. They just weren’t worth taking in.