[stormlord]

The primary reason I don't like experience penalties is because they make it harder for you to stay in level range of your friends. Apparently, the experience penalties, for races anyway, are not so severe that they prevent you from sticking with your friends. But when you stretch this whole idea to its limits, you see that it could easily wind up separating close friends because they're not within a similar power range. Part of the problem is that the whole EQ system demands that you be within a certain level range to group with others effectively. The other is that the system is not friendly to non-linear things. Most MMO's are conservative how they handle all this. Mostly because it's hard to test all of it and also because players can be hostile to certain things. Again, all of this wouldn't be nearly the kind of problem it's, if the system itself was changed fundamentally.

This is a bit of a recap but.... I have compared the warrior and ranger up about 20. Up to that point, a warrior has double attack and more hp. Maybe a bit more defense skill. If you twink them, their ac soft cap will be higher. But, generally, I would have to say that the ranger is more versatile and has higher burst dps because of Burst of Fire and Flame Lick. The versatility has so much subjective, yet meaningful value. Root is, at that level, very powerful. So is snare. I think the ranger is, well, funner to play too. Tracking is nice to have. The ability to solo whenever is a big bonus. These things give you more options and make the game funner. But at the higher levels, particularly, the warrior shines as a tank and becomes pretty much required for raids. A ranger can feel ignored by comparison. And it seems that tanking as a ranger gets harder and harder.

So: IS a ranger overpowered compared to a warrior? ARE hybrids overpowered compared to a warrior? Because, if they're not, experience penalty or no experience penalty, a penalty AT ALL is unnecessary. If you read the link I posted in the first post, you'll see that Verant/Sony argued that hybrids were not overpowered, therefore, an experience penalty is not needed (or any penalty, for that matter). Was this true pre-Velious?

(remember, the game went through changes from 1999-2001)

In summary: I think that at the lower levels, rangers are "overpowered". But at the higher levels, the warrior cements his place in the group and raid scene and becomes a prominent figure in norrath.

As for FUN FACTOR, I'd say a ranger is, by far, funner than a warrior. I still think, even now, that just because you can make a class that's boring and still balanced, doesn't mean you should. Warriors, by and large, are just too simple for my interest levels. I find it hard to justify them, to be honest. I know that their job can be quite hard when managing aggro, but when I add up everything that I've seen in all my years in EQ, I really have to question why warriors or other basic classes were ever even acceptable. To my eye, solo-able classes have more tools. That makes them fun. I think all classes should be more like that, not less like that. People like to have AVAILABLE options. A fluid wall, not a HARD wall. Players should be more closely involved.

To some extent, modern MMORPGs have caught onto this and tried to give classes more options. This has allowed them to solo better. I agree with this. Much of this is not about making games easier, it's about making them more interesting. It's a good change. I think that the whole solo/group thing in EQ was misplaced. Soloers HAVE to have tools to survive the many different kinds of encounters. This, generally, makes the game more interesting. Groupers, typically, have less tools because they depend on each other. The problme here was that classes which specialize should have had more things to keep them interesting. I think this is, in part, where EQ failed. Anyway... Many modern MMORPGs are too casual for me. I'm looking for more bite, but at the same time, I'm not a masochist, either. I want ways to avoid being hurt. Both preventative AND curative answers.

If a game can make INTERESTING specialized classes, then there's no need to have a multitude of classes that all do the same thing. Show me a warrior that's FUN and I'll bite. Get me?