Quote:
Originally Posted by Taminy
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
I remember hearing about AAs from another player before I read about them. Apparently they were going to be about "customizing" your character is what he said. I think this would have been better - and don't kill me here people but something more along the lines of arms vs fury vs prot warrior (at least that you would have to experience for). I think AAs done that way might have been better, but instead it was just how many AAs can you gather and make sure you min/max everything out.
|
I'm actually kind of glad that AAs were implemented as just a way to progress your character instead of specialize it. EQ has no room for class specialization. What would the advantage of a DPS warrior be over a monk or a rogue? Why would a cleric ever want to specialize in anything besides healing? WoW has a serious problem when it comes to this. You have certain classes like Paladins and Druids that are insanely flexible and can fit into a myriad of roles easily by respeccing, and then you have classes like Rogue who are way too one-dimensional. Rogues have 3 spec lines built around doing damage while a Druid can tank, heal, nuke, or melee dps. They're stuck. They could turn one of the Rogue lines into a "tank" spec based on evasion, but how would you balance it vs. Warriors, Druids, and Paladins? They would create raid bosses that hit ridiculously hard and required a Rogue evasion tank, sort of how Warlocks were required to tank certain bosses. It's superficial depth. It's like "oh cool I can respec my Warlock and tank one of the phases of this boss" but then you think of it and it's like "ok, so... what the fuck was the point of that?"
It's a huge can of worms that I'm glad EQ never got involved in. If you're going to have a base class + specialization system, you can only have like 3 or 4 base classes max before everything becomes retardedly redundant.