Green Monster Games (Curt Schilling)

[Rythonn]

I hate the class system, bring on the skills.

[Draegan]

Originally Posted by Maxxius

To what serious MMO? Only one drawing "serious" numbers out there is WOW.

Originally Posted by Bongk

and numbers mean what? The most popular anything is rarely the best, with AOL and McDonalds leading the charge.

You've got to admit that WOW is the most developed and most put together MMO out there to date, like it or not. VG and EQ2 can't hold a candle, neither can LOTRO or CoX. The only game that can come anywhere close to the quality of play and in game support and mechanics is EVE. Lets not talk about graphics for a second and just on game play in the MMO market. WOW has it's faults but it's an over all solid game. There's a reason that I spent most of this year trying out all the other available MMOs out there and still came back to WOW a month or so ago.

Perhaps theres another game on the horizon that will also be fun and well designed. I hope so. But it won't be a game with 30 different niche classes, that I can guarantee you.

[spronk]

An easier solution is to tailor the current encounter to the current class mix. MMOs would play much better if you could bring together 5-10 people, of any class/spec, and then the instance would shift to be a challenge to that group.

10 DPSers go in? No problem, you get mobs who can be interrupted, bashed, etc, don't hit hard, but perhaps have high HP or spawn multiple waves so you have to DPS quickly.

10 healers go in? No problem, mobs have high mana pools that need draining, focus on just one person and hit hard, every point of damage they do drains 2x damage to them, etc.

It would be highly refreshing if MMOs would focus once again on groups of friends coming together to spend some time together, rather than the ass-backwards way of an instance requiring X,Y,Z and a group of friends trying to figure out how to make A,B,C = X,Y,Z.

[Draegan]

I have no idea how hard/easy that would be to code, if thats even possible. It seems that it would be incredibly difficult, if not impossible.

[Gaereth]

But it is kinda the way things are going...someway, somehow. Either the content will change or the characters will change, it has to change.

People want variety within their similarities. The want to change up what they do, or how things appear to them, anything and everything. Classless may be an answer, or templates with skills on top, or something new and interesting.

-shrug- Who knows. Whatever it ends up being it just has to be hugely customizable and changable damn near on a whim.

The high hitpoint, high damage mobs came about as a method of progression. It was a way to make the content harder, nothing more. That is the quintissential rat with a million hitpoint problem..it does nothing to really further the game play.

The game play itself has to change and in the process the characters and their actions will change as well. If the game play stays the same then we will have the same issues and problems 10 years from now.

[tad10]

Originally Posted by Twobit Whore

That's like 30 classes that could just as easily be condensed into 10.. do not want.

Having more just for the sake of more is a pretty terrible idea. I'd really love to be the guy responsible for balancing that shit.. or no I wouldn't. You are going to end up with a handful of those classes being optimal for most situations and those will be the classes the majority plays. Everyone else will be useless.

Listen you dipshits (I refer to you and Drag) as noted several times already balancing WoW's 3 talent trees/class is no different than balancing 27 distinct classes with specific sets of abilities. There is no fucking difference between balancing 27 classes with one set of abilities and 9 classes with 3 talent trees.

The main advantage of 27 classes v 9/3 is that (a) other players know who and what the fuck they're getting when you join a party w/o asking your spec and (b) you get to feel like more of a_special_and_unique_snowflake as one of 27 named classes rather then just hunter_334.

And of course you're going to end up with classes that are optimal in different situations. The point is to mix up the content so different classes are optimal in different situations. Take the CC classes there are different CC abilities based on mob type (I cheated and just used WoW's mob types: elemental, demonic, humanoid, undead, animal -- but of course you could do more -- add angelic, slimes and vegetable). A character with demonic/undead/elemental CC will be better when you are facing demons/undead/elementals. The trick is to have some areas with D/U/E and others with humanoids/animals/whatever.

That is the way to make content interesting and challenging.

Ultimately the game is rock/paper/scissors right? You can build parties that are optimal against certain types of mobs: say demons. However you build dungeons so there is no all-demon, all-the-time dungeon. Your optimal party vs. Demons goes into typical_highend_dungeon. It has an easy time facing the demon encounters in wing A but then it has to fight elemental, humanoid or whatever in Wings B and C. Of course the party can disband and fly back -- but then the incur extensive downtime. They can instead take on the other wings and if they are moderately skilled they should be able to get through those too. Similiarly optimal party v. Humanoids easily beats Wing C but then must fight the demons in wing A or elementals in wing B.

* * *

I don't fucking care if you don't like my ideas (lets face it 2bit would hate almost any idea of mine just because its mine) but just say you don't like my ideas. Don't come up with bullshit reasons like it'd be impossible to balance.

Finally with your "having more for the sake of more" comment. You are flat out wrong. More can be mo' betta. I note that in life interesting things can happen when people are faced with a challenge. Balancing and creating content for 27 classes (or 9 classes with 3 talent trees) isn't particularly easy (one of the reasons I think why WoW is always late with patches and etc) -- but sometimes when the challenge is met you get a great game. A much better game than if you tried for something less. Of course you can always fail spectacularly (hello VG and three continents). But lets face it that's interesting too (though from a more can't help to stop and look at the carwreck point of view). Fuck making safe choices or keeping things small. Safe choices are for losers. Second place only gets you a set of steak knives.

[Campa]

Originally Posted by Draegan

I have no idea how hard/easy that would be to code, if thats even possible. It seems that it would be incredibly difficult, if not impossible.

WoW already uses a formula to measure item strength, so extend that system to do the same for player classes/builds & group makeup. When the group enters an instance it does a scan of the players & the group makeup and assigns a group rating. The instance then runs the appropriate scripts based on that group rating.

The hard part is designing the instance with certain "group ratings" in mind since it would need to be scalable rather than having fixed values for everything from mob stats to number of spawns to the loot tables to the AI scripts the mobs use and even respawn rates. Of course the advantage of such of a system would be the ability to make a 5/10/20/40/xx-man instance out of any instance that is designed.

But that is probably be a radically different approach to mob & dungeon design compared to what is currently done and would take a brave developer to attempt to build a game around such a system. Since if it doesn't work out then essentially everything on the PvE side of the house is hosed.

[Vatoreus]

If EVE had a more ingaging combat system (read more twitch) it would be the top dog MMO out there imo.

[Draegan]

EVE would instantly have more subs if you could actually improve your character through game play rather than sitting in a space dock waiting for your skills to tick complete.

Tad, WOW doesn't have 27 classes with talent specs thats just dumb. Each of the classes has inherent strengths and skills you're looking for. For example, Mages and Warlocks. Each spec has some form of CC and DPS no matter what spec. Rogues are the same, so are hunters. The only roles you have to make sure you understand before making a group are the Tank/Healer/DPS roles of classes like warriors, paladins, shamans and druids. And thats easy because all you have to do is whisper the person and ask their spec.

It would be nice in the /who list or LFG UI to have the spec by the persons name. Should be easy since they do it in the Armory already.

[Bongk]

Originally Posted by Draegan

Tad, WOW doesn't have 27 classes with talent specs thats just dumb. Each of the classes has inherent strengths and skills you're looking for.

Yes is does in many cases, you are saying a ret pally and a holy pally fill the same role? In many cases your wow spec completely changes your role making you effetively a different class.

[Draegan]

Originally Posted by Draegan

The only roles you have to make sure you understand before making a group are the Tank/Healer/DPS roles of classes like warriors, paladins, shamans and druids. And thats easy because all you have to do is whisper the person and ask their spec.

Can I quote myself?

[Bongk]

Originally Posted by Draegan

Can I quote myself?

so than you agree the half that classes at least are basically 3 different classes based on spec?

so how again was tad wrong?

[Draegan]

Because you have Mage, Warlock, Rogue and the Hunter. Thats 4 Classes. Then you have Warrior, Paladin, Druid, Shaman, that 4 class, each with different roles, so thats 8?

8 + 4 = 12 which is less than half of 27 or whatever number he was saying before.

[tad10]

Originally Posted by Draegan

Tad, WOW doesn't have 27 classes with talent specs thats just dumb.

D.

Does Blizz have to balance each of the talent trees a class has with the other 2 trees the class has as well as the 3 talent trees of all the other classes?

I'm not asking if the trees are correctly balanced (a whole nother question) -- but rather aren't they supposed to be balanced intra-class as well as inter-class?

How is that different than balancing 27 individual classes where those indivudal classes only have one known set of abilities?

[Twobit Whore]

I'm really not sure how you can classify a mage as 3 classes. The only thing the talents change is the nature of the spells used most often. Fire, ice or arcane. Sure each come with a couple of tools but none of them change the class so drastically that it requires a new title. Warlocks, hunters, rogues are the same. The only classes that I can see being even halfway debatable are priest-shadowpreist, paladins and shamans. Even then it's a stretch that makes Mr. Fantastic jealous.