At this point, best and worst classes in implementation?

Ravensign · 01-20-2003, 11:39 AM

What do people who have played the game to its fullest, which I assume is represented by a lot of the audience here, consider to be the best and worst implemented classes?

I think VI/SoE has at least tried to re-envisage classes as the game evolves, but some of those have started to become really far from the original "idea".

Hika Mindsong · 01-20-2003, 12:16 PM

Why don't you start by telling us your thoughts.

-- Hika

ericEQ · 01-20-2003, 12:18 PM

Enchanters can solo mobs that would otherwise take 1 or possibly 2 groups to kill.

Ravensign · 01-20-2003, 12:34 PM

Sorry for not providing my own thoughts, I just thought I would get things started.

Let's see, I think the Enchanter thing is not really a poorly implemented thing, I am not so much looking at balance, per se. The ability to manipulate minds kind of fits.

I would say that the Warrior is not implemented well, as they have to fight up hill to do thier job of taking advantage of their highest hit points. I think that extends to all pure melee, the tools that they are given to play are too simple, and I think it neuters their implementation in the game somewhat. The Rogues skulduggery, then Monk's honed fighting skill, the Warrior's mastery of Arms, dont really translate into the gameplay very well.

Merauk · 01-20-2003, 12:37 PM

Any class which I am currently playing is the worst implemented one.

Any class I am not playing is the best implemented one.

When I change classes to one which was best implemented it is immediately nerfed, and I realize that ever other class is better balanced then it.

nozflubber · 01-20-2003, 12:55 PM

Any class which I am currently playing is the worst implemented one.

Any class I am not playing is the best implemented one.

When I change classes to one which was best implemented it is immediately nerfed, and I realize that ever other class is better balanced then it.

I think any objective person can notice this phenomenon, so let's try and post about a class we don't play for the sake of fair arguements.

I play a bard, and I think SKs need some serious contributions to the raid aspect. They are fine in exp groups (better taunters than wars) but as a whole don't contribute much to a raid.

Snarf-O · 01-20-2003, 01:51 PM

Bards for both imo

ilian · 01-20-2003, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ericEQ
Enchanters can solo mobs that would otherwise take 1 or possibly 2 groups to kill.

So can almost every other pure-caster class, depending on level range and encounter.

But, I doubt the original poster wanted us to get into this can of worms again.

zuko · 01-20-2003, 03:10 PM

Warriors...broken since day one.. EQ devs are weakminded to really put some thought into it.

Best implemented NOW?...Ranger

WarderX · 01-20-2003, 03:32 PM

Then you'd be supprised to know that almost half of high end rangers hate archery

Warriortaco · 01-20-2003, 04:02 PM

ANd all high end clerics hate cheal no doubt...

ericEQ · 01-20-2003, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ilian

depending on level range and encounter.

Apparently I didn't make myself clear. If something can be killed by an enchanter--solo--but otherwise would not be killable by any less than 6 people, you have the current state of this game. Ok yeah, a wiz can kite a razorfiend in plane of valor, or a necro could solo an ent mob in HoHA, but if that was simply the case it wouldn't be a big deal. What im talking about is soloing BoT named hallway giants. I'd like to see any other class that is capable of killing something as powerful as this, or anything that drops things equivalent to these named. Enchanters have monopoly on runes and ornate armor right now, care to take a guess where its coming from?

Justy · 01-20-2003, 05:03 PM

Who really gives a flying turd about VI's implementation of classes? I am a ranger, have played one for over 2 years and during that time VI has constantly changed what Rangers should and should not be able to do... guess what I still play my the same way, I simply adjust my gear or tactics to allow me to do what I love to with my Ranger.

Heh · 01-20-2003, 06:04 PM

Anyone who's played a bard knows that it has, as stated before, both the best and the worst implementation, depending on how you look at it.

As far as class coolness and how well the class itself was done, it's the best. As far as the end result, and what it takes to get there (IE bare minimum of 2 keystrokes every 3 seconds vs pressing auto attack and a melee button every 5 seconds just to do what could at best be described as 'piss poor' damage), it's the worst.

feressa · 01-20-2003, 06:41 PM

EricEQ:

STFU!

01-20-2003, 11:39 AM	#1 (permalink)
Ravensign misses Sand Giants and shit like that Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Derv 2 Posts: 751 -1 Internets	At this point, best and worst classes in implementation? What do people who have played the game to its fullest, which I assume is represented by a lot of the audience here, consider to be the best and worst implemented classes? I think VI/SoE has at least tried to re-envisage classes as the game evolves, but some of those have started to become really far from the original "idea".

01-20-2003, 03:10 PM	#9 (permalink)
zuko Registered User Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 55 -1 Internets	Warriors...broken since day one.. EQ devs are weakminded to really put some thought into it. Best implemented NOW?...Ranger __________________ Zuko Takegami 70th Overlord - Immortal Wrath Terris-Thule

01-20-2003, 04:02 PM	#11 (permalink)
Warriortaco Registered User Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Kelethin Posts: 10 -1 Internets	ANd all high end clerics hate cheal no doubt... __________________ Oderry Badgerclaw Innoruuk

01-20-2003, 05:03 PM	#13 (permalink)
Justy Lazy Hoshina Wannabe Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 113 -1 Internets	Who really gives a flying turd about VI's implementation of classes? I am a ranger, have played one for over 2 years and during that time VI has constantly changed what Rangers should and should not be able to do... guess what I still play my the same way, I simply adjust my gear or tactics to allow me to do what I love to with my Ranger. __________________ Hopwin Tylor, Magelo Profile Terris-Thule Warder on The Armpit of EQ

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

01-20-2003, 12:16 PM	#2 (permalink)
Hika Mindsong The original liberal-fucking-hippie left-wing-cracker welfare-bitch Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Ak'anon Posts: 40 -1 Internets	Why don't you start by telling us your thoughts. -- Hika

01-20-2003, 12:18 PM	#3 (permalink)
ericEQ FYAD FYAD LOL Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 135 -1 Internets	Enchanters can solo mobs that would otherwise take 1 or possibly 2 groups to kill.

01-20-2003, 12:34 PM	#4 (permalink)
Ravensign misses Sand Giants and shit like that Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Derv 2 Posts: 751 -1 Internets	Sorry for not providing my own thoughts, I just thought I would get things started. Let's see, I think the Enchanter thing is not really a poorly implemented thing, I am not so much looking at balance, per se. The ability to manipulate minds kind of fits. I would say that the Warrior is not implemented well, as they have to fight up hill to do thier job of taking advantage of their highest hit points. I think that extends to all pure melee, the tools that they are given to play are too simple, and I think it neuters their implementation in the game somewhat. The Rogues skulduggery, then Monk's honed fighting skill, the Warrior's mastery of Arms, dont really translate into the gameplay very well.

01-20-2003, 12:37 PM	#5 (permalink)
Merauk Fires of Heaven Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 290 -1 Internets	Any class which I am currently playing is the worst implemented one. Any class I am not playing is the best implemented one. When I change classes to one which was best implemented it is immediately nerfed, and I realize that ever other class is better balanced then it.

01-20-2003, 12:55 PM	#6 (permalink)
nozflubber Registered User Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 62 -1 Internets	Any class which I am currently playing is the worst implemented one. Any class I am not playing is the best implemented one. When I change classes to one which was best implemented it is immediately nerfed, and I realize that ever other class is better balanced then it. I think any objective person can notice this phenomenon, so let's try and post about a class we don't play for the sake of fair arguements. I play a bard, and I think SKs need some serious contributions to the raid aspect. They are fine in exp groups (better taunters than wars) but as a whole don't contribute much to a raid.

01-20-2003, 01:51 PM	#7 (permalink)
Snarf-O Registered User Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 62 -1 Internets	Bards for both imo

01-20-2003, 03:32 PM	#10 (permalink)
WarderX Registered User Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Atlanta, Georgia Posts: 1,593 +1 Internets	Then you'd be supprised to know that almost half of high end rangers hate archery

01-20-2003, 06:04 PM	#14 (permalink)
Heh Banned Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 414 +0 Internets	Anyone who's played a bard knows that it has, as stated before, both the best and the worst implementation, depending on how you look at it. As far as class coolness and how well the class itself was done, it's the best. As far as the end result, and what it takes to get there (IE bare minimum of 2 keystrokes every 3 seconds vs pressing auto attack and a melee button every 5 seconds just to do what could at best be described as 'piss poor' damage), it's the worst.

01-20-2003, 06:41 PM	#15 (permalink)
feressa Registered User Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 70 -1 Internets	EricEQ: STFU!