|
|
#42
08-02-2016, 03:37 PM
|
|||
|
Dynamic ZEM by zone popularity I think would have been good. Zones with very few players in them would essentially get a large ZEM. It would encourage players to travel to places they wouldn't normally go.
Better caster scaling with gear & removal of CH/defensive. Casters would of course need a lower baseline power but it'd even out. Warriors could just get a lesser innate damage reduction. Cleric would need a line of strong but slow heals to offset losing CH. Also better aggro for Warriors...they're a tank class. More race/religion/class having an impact on faction and quests. It felt like what you were didn't matter as much in Kunark and Velious as Classic. Same for items that depend on race/religion. Agree with merging Wizard/Mage, and having Beastmaster instead. Ranger should be more bow focused from the start, with or without AAs. | ||
|
|
|||
|
#43
08-02-2016, 04:12 PM
|
||||
|
Quote:
Rogues would probably have a problem with this, lol.
__________________
-Aftermath-
Tasslehof - 60 Druid Barlow - 60 monk Blueberrii - 60 Mage Gigglepurr - 60 Shaman Kids - 60 Rogue Fornfamnad - 60 Cleric | |||
|
|
||||
|
#44
08-02-2016, 04:33 PM
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#46
08-02-2016, 05:17 PM
|
|||
|
OOC regen means less dependency on healing classes - as soon as you can find a mob that gives you exp and you can kill before they kill you - you can solo for exp, regardless of your class.
One of the big things in (classic) EQ is being dependent on other players (unless you're a sociopathic necro of course). | ||
|
|
|||
|
#47
08-02-2016, 05:18 PM
|
|||
|
re:
Put a wall sized plaque in the middle of Freeport that says:
"Verily ye we say, there may be additional convenience modifications we will make within the game and to the interface in the eons that follow that we could not foresee as useful to players. Thy shall not interpret what ye sees here as the entire vision. We are talking to you, Ele, so piss off." | ||
|
|
|||
|
#49
08-02-2016, 05:52 PM
|
|||
|
Heh, there are so many systems in EQ that are so poorly designed you wonder if they were even play tested it (the tedium and poor scaling of crafting, for instance).
One issue with EQ is that there are a lot of unnecessary and deliberate time sinks. Things that make the game artificially hard, but don't actually demand more of you as a player. The cynical view is that these mechanics were intended as a money-grab per EQ's subscription model, but maybe it was more that the devs just didn't know how to do any better. Poopsocking aside, the main beef I've always had with EQ is that so many of the unique abilities are concentrated in such a tiny minority of classes. Generally, casters have a monopoly on both convenience and power/diversity of abilities, and I think this is a problem. There's an interesting interview with Rob Pardo (one of the then EQ-playing designers of vanilla WoW) where he explains how he attempted to rectify a lot of these annoying design goofs he noticed playing EQ when creating vanilla WoW. Interesting listen, especially for devs/designers: https://www.idlethumbs.net/designern...b-pardo-part-2 I enjoy classic EQ for the nostalgia and the dynamics of the virtual world/community...but certainly not for the game design. | ||
|
|
|||
|
#50
08-02-2016, 05:59 PM
|
|||
|
For example, when playing my bard AoE kiting is incredibly efficient, but the high risk and amount of fatigue burns you out really quickly. Grouping has much less friction/anguish, a social component, and the greater possibility of obtaining loot.
For some classes in EQ the incentives balance out, and I've actually done about half AoE and half grouping at this point (level 50). I wish the design was such that more classes could enjoy that dynamic. Contrast with a game like WoW as you find it today, where *everything* is completely frictionless and efficient...and well, yeah. /endrant | ||
|
|
|||
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
