EQ theory explanation?

[Wakanda]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Melee characters (when twinked) can power through low level content quite well, because they don't need to meditate back mana. My Monk from 1-30 with a fungi could just about non-stop auto attack mobs to death for the most part without sitting, unless I got really greedy and pulled too many. My twinked Warrior in a Ceremonial Iksar Chestplate had a similar experience from 1-24.

But I do agree with you that Everquest casters are stronger in the low levels than their DnD counterparts. DnD casters were basically useless for the first few levels lol.

This isn't melee exclusive though. Get some HP items, a velium crystal staff and a tolapumj robe and you'll basically be a melee DPS with pets and sick nukes until 20+.

If we counting priests too then it's going to become even more trivial with sarnak devastators, oakleaf scimitars, rune etched icewurm fangs, girdle of rapidity, and fungus tunics.

Edit hopefully I don’t sound hostile, but I’m just keeping it real �� I’m leveling an enchanter atm and I feel like a beast lord running around with my pet crocodile and easily face tanking mobs I’ve slowed while beating them to death with random frost strike procs. Necromancer was even more faceroll, Harmshield, lifetaps, snare/fear. Class legit feels like a shadow knight for the first 20 levels ��

[magnetaress]

Yep. DnD. Casters are Gandalf. Melee r meant to team up. Casters are too butt we developed the enchanter/
shm meta as emergent play.

I'll be 10000% with you. Casters have it a bit too easy on p99. Especially enchanters. Everyone grouped for safety. Especially against DC's and lag.

[Danth]

Originally Posted by Topgunben [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Did Brad ever explain why certain things were the way they were in classic?

Just a couple of examples below but we all know there are a lot more.

-Casters are simply more powerful than melee, was it a willful imbalance? Or accidental?
-regen rates are virtually the same for casters as they are melee?
-wizards are kind of shitty
-certain zones are just dog shit. Beholders maze is just one example.

It was all talked about on usenet or the various EQ-related boards, but good luck finding all the discussion today. Verant's right arm didn't always know what its left was doing, so sometimes you got completely different answers from one developer to the next.

The idea with casters was they were stronger as long as they had mana, but they paid for it with lengthy downtime and blind spellbook meditating. It didn't work out all that well in practice because often enough the melee had to sit around waiting on casters anyway, and melee gear was so weak that melee players couldn't really take much advantage.

Some zones were plain unfinished, and a few weren't implemented at all. Same issue most of these types of games have. In EQ, more often than not the unfinished parts tended to stay unfinished. Development preferred to focus on the never ending expansion rush or money was diverted into other projects.

989/Verant was repeatedly told Wizards weren't great, but they doubled down. It was supposed to have the highest burst damage of any class--which it does. Just VI apparently thought burst was way more important than the players did. Wizards did provide a group protection against kill-stealing, so there was that, and with most experience groups waiting around for spawns between cycles, without P99-style nonstop fighting, they didn't seem as bad as they do on here.

[magnetaress]

Melee be liek

[Ciderpress]

The imbalance is crucial to the charm of classic EQ. A big problem I have with modern mmo's is that everything feels homogenous. You can easily over-balance things to a point where no one class really feels any more or less specialized at anything than any other class, like there's just one big generic all-purpose class that everybody's playing.

You might say EQ was TOO imbalanced, but I'll still gladly take it over the watered down experiences on offer today. I don't care how pretty your game engine is if I never once feel any kind of investment in my character.

[Evia]

Originally Posted by Ciderpress [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The imbalance is crucial to the charm of classic EQ. A big problem I have with modern mmo's is that everything feels homogenous. You can easily over-balance things to a point where no one class really feels any more or less specialized at anything than any other class, like there's just one big generic all-purpose class that everybody's playing.

You might say EQ was TOO imbalanced, but I'll still gladly take it over the watered down experiences on offer today. I don't care how pretty your game engine is if I never once feel any kind of investment in my character.

This is so true. I think one of the major reasons I hate modern MMOs is that the obsession on "balance" has totally gutted all creativity and uniqueness in different class options in modern games.

[magnetaress]

One of the downfalls of modern wow is Tanks being able to self heal and dps effectively enough "they don't need their groups". It's only inconvenient butt they can solo slowly the big bosses.

Warriors give up the ability to solo so they can take the big hits. To solo they would need massive hp pools and fights would last upwards of 40 minutes. So they are relegated to dpsing and taking the hits for their team. That said two warriors can easily trade off and succeed very well with just bind wound. EQ gets good when you add another... ench/clr combo way better than solo ench. Trios are the sweet spot unless you have a full group with plenty of mobs around.

[Jimjam]

Originally Posted by magnetaress [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

One of the downfalls of modern wow is Tanks being able to self heal and dps effectively enough "they don't need their groups". It's only inconvenient butt they can solo slowly the big bosses.

Warriors give up the ability to solo so they can take the big hits. To solo they would need massive hp pools and fights would last upwards of 40 minutes. So they are relegated to dpsing and taking the hits for their team. That said two warriors can easily trade off and succeed very well with just bind wound. EQ gets good when you add another... ench/clr combo way better than solo ench. Trios are the sweet spot unless you have a full group with plenty of mobs around.

Warrior was so powerful on p99 when sneak pulling was in and bind wound could be done in combat while taking/doing damage.

Well, still not as powerful as the top tier classes, but it was a window into 'if Verant made warriors have decent self support like modern (read 2004) MMOs'.

[Topgunben]

Originally Posted by Jimjam [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Warrior was so powerful on p99 when sneak pulling was in and bind wound could be done in combat while taking/doing damage.

Well, still not as powerful as the top tier classes, but it was a window into 'if Verant made warriors have decent self support like modern (read 2004) MMOs'.

It seems as though balances can blur lines between classes so badly that they become a bowl of mush.

However, giving warriors some type of double bonus to AC from worn armor would balance the classes and while also further distinguishing them.

[Toxigen]

also all the drugs brad was doing off strippers buttholes