Forums » General Pantheon Discussion

Questions and Feedback after April 2 dev stream

    • 406 posts
    April 3, 2020 11:57 AM PDT

    Taking out downranking spells is a mistake.  That was exceptionally fun and emergent gameplay in both EQ1 and WoW.  I'm okay with the combo system, but be careful, nobody wants twitch or action based combat in this game.  Adding some more strategy and synergy is fine, but this is a very thin line you need to walk.  This *almost* feels like you found an investor that demanded you add more modern aspects to the game, and that would not be a positive thing.  I did appreciate the modern take on the EQ1 shaman, I think you hit a homerun there.  Stream was good, taking out downranking was bad.  Agree with the idea that if you hold down "Shift" when you cast or perform an ability, it would do the ability at half resource cost and half impact.  That type of built in downranking functionality would allow for emergent gameplay and strategy as you build up spell power and stats, but also avoid the clutter in the Codex you guys aim to avoid.  Consider it.

     

    Also, it appears the Wizard's mystery 4th magic school is "Essence", so does that mean a Wizard can essentially be a Blood Mage if they focus on that?  If so, hell freaking yeah!


    This post was edited by Mathir at April 3, 2020 12:11 PM PDT
    • 18 posts
    April 3, 2020 12:12 PM PDT

    I Like the down ranking gone  I like the fast heal big heal heal overtime myself. how many of the 8 spell gems you get  do you want to use for heals. If you go  WoW down ranking was an exploit of the system really it was about stacking +healing gear then spaming low level heals it made Holy Paladin the tank healer meta and made playing one a one key spam

     


    This post was edited by Vixx at April 3, 2020 12:18 PM PDT
    • 2160 posts
    April 3, 2020 12:15 PM PDT

    I want action and twitch combat in this game. Actually, I just want all of the abilities removed and replaced with guns. Pantheon will be a revolutionary FPS MMO with open world content.

    • 2621 posts
    April 3, 2020 12:28 PM PDT

    Nephele said:

    Iksar said:

    Nephele said:

    - Overall I like the way it is working but I feel like there needs to be something that allows for diversity within characters of the same class at max level/mastery, above and beyond LAS choices. This does not mean a specialization system per se - but players should have the opportunity to develop distinct styles and should be rewarded for that to some extent.

    Hard disagree on that. Not sure what that would be other than specialization, but I am entirely over that kind of thing. I want a return to knowing exactly what any given class will bring to the table without having to wade through "specs" or other distinctions that may alter their gameplay. 

    Can you elaborate on the reasons for your frustrations?  This isn't me needling you - I would honestly like to understand your point of view better.

    I think if players want to stand out against others within the same class they should do so with by becoming skilled and friendly, making their own reputation as good in every respect.

    Splitting classes in any meaningful way has rarely if ever led to anything more than the illusion of choice, the objectively best option and the lesser option(s).

    I don't think diversity for the sake of itself is a good thing for classes and what they can do, and it dilutes class identity. If I pick a monk I want to be a monk and all that class encompasses, not an X monk or a Y monk. At the base of it with no other factors, when being considered for groups/encounters I want to have equal consideration next to any other monk. Likewise I want to be able to pick any given class for a group and know exactly what they bring in terms of abilities/spells, that they bring the full class to the table. 

    • 1347 posts
    April 3, 2020 2:05 PM PDT

    Mathir said:

    Taking out downranking spells is a mistake.  That was exceptionally fun and emergent gameplay in both EQ1 and WoW.  I'm okay with the combo system, but be careful, nobody wants twitch or action based combat in this game.  Adding some more strategy and synergy is fine, but this is a very thin line you need to walk.  This *almost* feels like you found an investor that demanded you add more modern aspects to the game, and that would not be a positive thing.  I did appreciate the modern take on the EQ1 shaman, I think you hit a homerun there.  Stream was good, taking out downranking was bad.  Agree with the idea that if you hold down "Shift" when you cast or perform an ability, it would do the ability at half resource cost and half impact.  That type of built in downranking functionality would allow for emergent gameplay and strategy as you build up spell power and stats, but also avoid the clutter in the Codex you guys aim to avoid.  Consider it.

    Agreed.
    Removing downranked spells is particularly headscratching in light of progeny and mentoring. 
    Without being able to pick and choose, now you're faced with potentially arbitrary scaling, which.. never almost never works out very well.
    Heck, allowing the player/caster to simply remove the entry from the codex and turn it into a scroll or similar item (so it becomes an inventory item) is at least possible, never mind an additional tab or other elegant UI element that stores all othe old spells.
    "clutter" is not a reason to throw away player choice.  It's a solved problem in any reasonable UI implementation.

    • 57 posts
    April 3, 2020 2:36 PM PDT

    There was definitely a fair amount of information to digest from this stream which was nice. There were some things I definitely liked and some things I didn't. I won't go into great detail on all of it, because it really won't matter until this stuff can be tested to see how it plays out. That is where my biggest problem lies though. So many aspects of the game recently are being designed, redesigned, then reworked and redesigned again (codex, ability points/spell mastery, downranking, etc), all in a vacuum. There has been no testing in over 15 months. I really think before making all these design decisions to rework things time and again, VR really needs to get this stuff in the hands of the players, even if it's only the VIPs to actually test it and see how it feels in practice to a greater audience besides just the small dev team. Time to let the guard down a little and pull the curtain back before you get to a point you're too far in to change and you're left with a product that alienates part of your intended original playerbase.

    • 1707 posts
    April 3, 2020 3:05 PM PDT

    If a supposedly weaker or obsolete ability turns out to be more efficient or effective, then, to me, that seems like a design error and not an attempt to add choice or tactics.

    I do not want the kind of 'choice' that has people analysing combat logs and trying to tell me I should be using a spell from 2 upgrades ago because its 2% more efficient.

    I want my choice to be a variety of interesting abilities, not several versions of the same ones on multiple hotbars.

    Clutter is not a reason to throw away choice. But good design is a reason to remove clutter (and is usually necessary). Removing the clutter will free up the devs to design a skill set with meaningful choice and avoid metagames over minutiae.

    I get that some people enjoy that stuff - I'm not saying your opinion is wrong - but finding that stuff fun is very subjective.

    • 1160 posts
    April 3, 2020 3:48 PM PDT

    vjek said:

    Mathir said:

    Taking out downranking spells is a mistake.  That was exceptionally fun and emergent gameplay in both EQ1 and WoW.  I'm okay with the combo system, but be careful, nobody wants twitch or action based combat in this game.  Adding some more strategy and synergy is fine, but this is a very thin line you need to walk.  This *almost* feels like you found an investor that demanded you add more modern aspects to the game, and that would not be a positive thing.  I did appreciate the modern take on the EQ1 shaman, I think you hit a homerun there.  Stream was good, taking out downranking was bad.  Agree with the idea that if you hold down "Shift" when you cast or perform an ability, it would do the ability at half resource cost and half impact.  That type of built in downranking functionality would allow for emergent gameplay and strategy as you build up spell power and stats, but also avoid the clutter in the Codex you guys aim to avoid.  Consider it.

    Agreed.
    Removing downranked spells is particularly headscratching in light of progeny and mentoring. 
    Without being able to pick and choose, now you're faced with potentially arbitrary scaling, which.. never almost never works out very well.
    Heck, allowing the player/caster to simply remove the entry from the codex and turn it into a scroll or similar item (so it becomes an inventory item) is at least possible, never mind an additional tab or other elegant UI element that stores all othe old spells.
    "clutter" is not a reason to throw away player choice.  It's a solved problem in any reasonable UI implementation.

    Agreed some more. So in theory I'm a lvl 50 Wizard that decides to level up skinning and out of my hypothetical 1000 mana pool I need a level 50 spell costing 100 mana doing 500dps to kill that Bunny for the 50 Rabbit skins I'm going to need instead of loading up my old level 5 spell that cost 10 mana that can easily one shot the bunny... but instead I'm going to kill 10 bunnys and have to mana up.

    Or, as was pointed out... hold Shift, or Alt at for 50% cost so in that case, I can kill 20 bunny's before I'm OOM.

    That lvl 5 spell I could get all I needed with 50% of my mana left to spare.

    Next level in my Skinning I need Bear Skins.... I need to now load up a lvl 15 spell using 25 mana.

     

    As far as the "clutter" goes. Like Vjex says,  

    " It's a solved problem in any reasonable UI implementation."

    Seems all your considering is end game and rushing to max for raiding when other parts of the game aren't considered. 

    I'll see it when testing starts, but this is what it sounds like.

    • 217 posts
    April 3, 2020 11:20 PM PDT

    Synergy vs. Combos

    Combos sound stupid and Pantheon would be wise to avoid it. Synergy Sounds intriguing and I am looking forward to test it out. Not sure why so many people are jumping on this "combo" talk, as I don't think that word was even used in the stream. Having self-synergy does create a spell rotation, which would be unfortunate if that became a dominant feature, but if you sprinkle in self-synergy I think its a great idea. As for inter-player synergy, keep in mind that most fights are going to be maybe 30 seconds. Synergy won't be make or break most of the time. Remember in EQ2 and the "heroic opportunity" wheel? If you have a well-oiled group, then sure you would be using that. But most of the time you wouldn't worry about it and it wouldn't be a detriment.

    As an additional aside, putting an enemy in a "state" gives some cool creative flexibility for VR to give us some intricate raid encounters. Overall, I'm cautiously optimistic with the synergy/state system. Don't make it a combo system, and don't make this a spell-rotation game, and this will be great.

    Down Ranking

    Lots of good points being made here. If I recall correctly, Joppa said those lower rank spells were removed to prevent someone from having multiple ranks of the same spell and chaining those spells, and to prevent clutter. I personally am fine with clutter, even as an EQ enchanter which had an insane amount of spells. I kind of liked it actually. One happy compromise would be to put all downrankings on the same recast timer. Then you couldn't chain.

    One additional problem that wasn't raised in the stream, is with the mastery system. If you have different ranks of the same spell, are you going to need to spend the 1/4/9 MP into each rank of the spell/ability? Seems like getting rid of downranking makes it obvious that once you spend a MP into a spell, that will remain even you get the upgraded version of the spell/ability.

    I am fine with downranking, but those inferior versions of the spell should be on the same cool down timers, and buffs should not stack.

    Mastery System

    Very cool stuff here. So if you get 1 MP per level, plus have a separate mastery xp bar, and have mastery loot "goblins" (a throwback to diablo), You should be able to get a good chunk of MP without having to really go out of your way. If you get 1 spell per level, then your MP from leveling could always be put into the new spell you also received, and you can technically always have 1 MP into every spell if you wanted. I hope there are a lot of different non-spell/ability opportunities to put your MP's into.

    In regards to the progeny system, it seems like VR is still trying to figure out how to get that system to work, but I wonder if you will be able to spend MP's that will increase stats/abilities for all of the characters on your account.

    As far as the mastery shards are concerned, I can see the bots trying to farm those and open up a RL market for people to spend cash for unlimited MP's. Gotta be careful with that. I would much rather people just pay VR for those Mastery Points rather than some Korean farming operation, and I am very anti-paytowin. No cash shops. I'm worried that with these in the game Pantheon will become P2W. With that said, I love the idea of mastery shards. A possible solution would be to make the shards no-drop, and allow "commission" tradeskilling where you a tradeskiller can make an item with ingredients in another player's inventory.

     

    Kudos to VR on an overall amazing stream. Hopefully we will be seeing one of those for every class. That will definitely give us all something to look forward to while we wait for PA5/alpha/beta/launch.

    • 242 posts
    April 4, 2020 2:45 AM PDT

    General feedback: Overall I was impressed with the direction. It's nice to see a direction where healers are healers, and even when they are in dps situations there is an emphasis on group support, utility, and setup vs just pumping out numbers. I am interested in seeing how the other two healers and their abilities are being designed with this general direction in mind, but this was encouraging to see.

    Concerns: I only have two minor(ish) concerns about what was presented.

    1. Synergies are awesome, but I would hope that they are dynamic and not something like GW2 where basically everyone could set up the synergy/detonates the same synergy based on weapon choice (aka skill set up). GW2 presented a very homogenized form of synergies that really didn't add anything overtly unique to its combat system. 

     2. My second issue is with the mastery orbs and fragments. I don't think that these are items that should be free trade. I think that this is part of character progression and should only be usable by the character that obtains them. I also would question their means of being looted in a group situation. I would hope that they are not something that could be subjected to greed/ ninja looting. I almost want to say that if a fragment/ completed orb did drop then everyone in the group should receive it as loot, otherwise it needs to be something that is treated as an innate personal roll with every kill.

    • 485 posts
    April 4, 2020 4:50 AM PDT

    The risk of showing a VERY specific CLASS ability choice play out. Is that, one is in danger of not being able to zoom out and generalize or see the bigger picture. Remarks and concerns are of course still an obvious consequence. However, most of these might need practical experience to get an answer.

    To the remark: Class X must spend mastery points in order to be good at something….

    That does seem quite obvious. Not sure why that surprises people. Each class has a wide array of spells or abilities. You can go to be that one shaman that is fully going for Hots (heals over time) or DH (direct heals or spells of similar effect). Or you can take a different path and evolve into a dps or debuff expert as a shaman.

    To me the mastery system provides you with different pathways. Understanding that they are not highways and will require a decent amount of playtime (at least I sure hope so), means that you’ll be playing and feeling the consequences of your choices during this process. Just consider how many points they have spent during the stream in total. And imagine how long it will take for 1 player to make that choice.

    A downside to me, for what I’ve seen there are no forks in the road. So in the end you’ll still be able to get it all, however the prioritization of mastered abilities will define your playstyle. How different that will actual feel on shaman alongside another, I’m assuming testing will work that out even further.

    Cross-class synergy. I’m quite intrigued to find out how many players will end up using this design. The main road so far, strength through each individual player/class without other class/player synergy. This on its own is quite a different mind-set. Many people, will have known only to play from their own strengths and skills, instead of trying to work out benefits from playing in synergy with others, especially in situations where they might not shine as much as an individual. MMO’s have been very self-centred in their class design and relating abilities.

    It becomes really interesting when you start thinking about this synergy as optional or obligatory or situational. Synergy by choice could mean that if players choose specific abilities and play with others that do the same (in their own class), they will be playing in a different playstyle and mind-set. Synergy becoming obligatory will definitely receive a lot of resistance as it’s within expectations that many players will want to choose to master abilities that lets them shine and excel in what they want and are skilled at. Then there is situational synergy. If players have chosen some mastery points into group synergy abilities, it will become useful within certain situations or environments. However, this should not exclude the content from players that have not chosen these group synergy abilities. Choosing to invest in group synergy mastery can facilitate certain situations and create a less taxing player experience. So you could plough through without, but it’s just more fun and easier with it.

    Similar to what Fragile said; The main abilities and skills could already provide for the overall synergy between classes. Don’t make it too complex (yet?). The shown synergy potential could be something for the long run, after the base class synergy has been tested/played extensively?

     As said before, NOT a fan of craft able mastery shards. That’s a big ball dropped if you ask me. It just screams; farming, auctions, grinds, elitism, egoistic behaviour. Earn it by actions, explorations, skills, insights, survival, ingenuity, just don’t make it into a drop or craft able feature. There will be plenty of other stuff for elitism, auctions and farm, don’t just implement this trigger to this kind of behaviour so obviously.


    This post was edited by Barin999 at April 4, 2020 5:36 AM PDT
    • 485 posts
    April 4, 2020 5:03 AM PDT

    I agree with Vandraad on struggling to find logic in design Damage of Timer spells with a self-buff component. Unless part of a bigger plan in class designs and spells. Still, for a launch state, it does seem to be going a bit too complex already. (Leave some for expansions.)

    Combos can be nice, when they are optional and situational. In line with Nephele’s comment, if just a matter of mind memory press 2 then press 1.. it’s really taking the wrong viewpoint from other mmo’s and how they worked out combos. Again, combos do seems something for expansions, instead of from launch. I get that the world of Terminus is already more challenging and taxing then what most expect that it’s going to be. Adding in combos can be a nice element for tactical players in a tactical situation. However, not every mob should require the same combos or any at all. One should/will still be able get the mob down without using the combos. Instead, some mobs/areas/situations could call for more tactical spells rotation (if you want to name it that). And it’s in those moments that a tactical player will shine by using tactical combos, specific for that fight. If I’m not mistaking that requires some reverse engineering in the sense that VR will need to design general mobs and specific mobs based on what combos might be possible.

    Not sure why you fell of those numbers overhead, Vandraad. I see it as a simple UI option and was shown to discuss and display how certain spells and abilities worked.

    • 485 posts
    April 4, 2020 5:26 AM PDT

    Down ranking gone: Not sure why that doesn’t puzzle me.

    If you want a low level spell with little mana cost. Just don’t upgrade it/don’t put mastery points in it. And choose to master other abilities instead. (But I might be oversimplifying it.) The increased mana requirement for upgraded spells does seem fine to me. If you end up with a spell that requires more mana and you can no longer sufficiently deploy it…well it was your choice to advance that ability up to that point, so why complain? One thing obviously. Before you finalize mastery point investments, you should be told what the requirements/expenses will be of the upgraded ability. From this point, it actually becomes interesting, where players need to manage their mastered abilities and their manapool (which doesn’t expand parallel with the mastered abilities). Now you’re in a scenario where players can pick and choose which spells to upgrade and which not (yet). Perhaps saving up mastery points could be a thing, to hold off for an increase of the manapool. Is that a bad thing? Not really, how eager you are to spend mastery points will become part of your character’s identity and playstyle. Or for those that are linked to power providing players/classes, they can try to work out a ability choice of their own.

    Having to rely on an older spell for an advanced situation. That does sound like an old habit dying hard. Choices do matter, so that also means that you should accept what you have and go forward with it. If you can't rely on an older spell, well that might just be your challenge to conquer then. How do you succeed without having this mechanical choice as an option. Overall this “problem” would be evident for all players, so it’s not really a problem anymore. It’s an actual game/design choice. In this game, you just won’t be able to do that. Period. ?


    This post was edited by Barin999 at April 4, 2020 5:37 AM PDT
    • 485 posts
    April 4, 2020 5:45 AM PDT

    Zorkon said:

    ... a lvl 50 Wizard that decides to level up skinning and out of my hypothetical 1000 mana pool I need a level 50 spell costing 100 mana doing 500dps to kill that Bunny for the 50 Rabbit skins I'm going to need instead of loading up my old level 5 spell that cost 10 mana that can easily one shot the bunny... but instead I'm going to kill 10 bunnys and have to mana up...

    I found this very amusing. If you are a level 50 character and are trying to kill a mob of level 5 or 25... heck just melee it. This does not seem a problem relating to the down ranking of spells. Even a dot or harmfull debuff could already destroy the mob. This appears to be a clear example of, let's wait how this unrolls in game itself. You're trying to kill a mosquito with a bazooka here. Your melee hit would already be sufficient and most likely quicker than any spell being cast. 

    If you're afraid of getting hurt by a mob 45 or 25 levels below you. Perhaps go find some decent armour instead? Although it's highly likely that you already are wearing armour that outclasses these mobs anyway.


    This post was edited by Barin999 at April 4, 2020 5:46 AM PDT
    • 1127 posts
    April 4, 2020 7:21 AM PDT

     

    After listening to the stream I am pretty hopeful.

    States:

    That there are both Target states (like windswept and water spell) and PC states (surging power) seems fine to me.

    Target states are a way to magnify abilities (both increases and decreases). Your group will decide their LASs based on their group makeup and which of the offensive and defensive states your team wants to utilize based on class mix and mastery choices. So almost more than looking for a specific class you will be trying to build a specific synergy when building a group.

    PC states will be tools you use to utilize within your LAS to build a specific temporary specialty. While the shaman can do damage and set up states it will be at the cost of having other healing abilities up. If the shaman on the other hand is the primary healer then the combination of active and utility powers they choose to load will be healing focused rather than damage focused. Based on the masteries a shaman has choosen to unlock first they will likely say that they are a “windswept shaman” or a “surging power shaman” when looking for group. Only at end game will shamans be expected to do both as an example.

    Certain mastery meta's of one class will mesh better with other mastery meta's of other classes. If you have a stable leveling group/caravan then the choice of order for spending mastery points will be able to be tuned to directly increase the synergy of your standard team.

    The Masteries and synergies will hurt soloists the most and I am ok with that. This is supposed to be a group game and its more than fair for a group of 6 to be able to do 10-20 times the damage of a single player trying to have a balanced LAS for soloing.

     

    Mastery Shards:

    Right at first I thought shards, and the subsequent crafting, was just a gimmick way to bring crafters into the mastery system. I do still feel that way and other than maybe an alchemist or stone carver recipe I think it would be better for it to be some no fail turn in quest rather than a crafting recipe. Crafting needs to stand on its own not be propped up by a gimmick.

    What could be intriguing with mastery shards though is that they could become the one true high end currency within Pantheon. Coin almost always becomes massively inflated and looses relative value to rare items. If the shards became 100 times more common but required 400 shards rather than 4 to create a stone then the shards would be plentiful enough to use as a currency for most of the rarer items rather than only for the true endgame BIS items. I would actually then start adding mastery shards into top end crafting as a high value optional material component to help validate the power level increases.

     

    Down ranking go bye bye:

    Down ranking was only ever used instances where efficiency was an issue or when you were trying to trigger some state on the cheap. By changing abilities from one with many ranks to a scaling ability based on stats and the mastery points you have invested into it you greatly simplify the UI, the manual coding of abilities and have tighter control on unintended consequences. There is then no need for down ranking as the mana costs will not especially change. You only need to have ranks if you intent for mana to balloon like we are used to HP ballooning, on that note hopefully HP does not balloon either in Pantheon. (see logarithmic power growth by level)

     


    This post was edited by Trasak at April 4, 2020 7:23 AM PDT
    • 1160 posts
    April 4, 2020 10:10 AM PDT

    Barin999 said:

    Zorkon said:

    ... a lvl 50 Wizard that decides to level up skinning and out of my hypothetical 1000 mana pool I need a level 50 spell costing 100 mana doing 500dps to kill that Bunny for the 50 Rabbit skins I'm going to need instead of loading up my old level 5 spell that cost 10 mana that can easily one shot the bunny... but instead I'm going to kill 10 bunnys and have to mana up...

    I found this very amusing. If you are a level 50 character and are trying to kill a mob of level 5 or 25... heck just melee it. This does not seem a problem relating to the down ranking of spells. Even a dot or harmfull debuff could already destroy the mob. This appears to be a clear example of, let's wait how this unrolls in game itself. You're trying to kill a mosquito with a bazooka here. Your melee hit would already be sufficient and most likely quicker than any spell being cast. 

    If you're afraid of getting hurt by a mob 45 or 25 levels below you. Perhaps go find some decent armour instead? Although it's highly likely that you already are wearing armour that outclasses these mobs anyway.

    You play a melee class don't you?


    This post was edited by Zorkon at April 4, 2020 3:20 PM PDT
    • 21 posts
    April 4, 2020 10:15 AM PDT

    Fragile said:

    I don't see why there needs to be this super forced "synergy" when it will already exist from normal spells/abilities and class roles/dynamics. It honestly is looking a lot like feature/scope creep, and a lot less like the traditional "old-school" MMO that we have all pledged to.

     

    Pretty much sums up my thoughts

    • 18 posts
    April 4, 2020 11:10 AM PDT

    Group looking for shaman healer with 100 MP must have windswept rank 3 have meta class X Y Z  so we can Meta this boss.

    Then in group hit 1 to get buff to hit heal 2 instant to get max heal from 3  this is combo play all well watching all these flashing procs from the Synergy system.

    • 1127 posts
    April 4, 2020 11:20 AM PDT

    Thump said:

    Fragile said:

    I don't see why there needs to be this super forced "synergy" when it will already exist from normal spells/abilities and class roles/dynamics. It honestly is looking a lot like feature/scope creep, and a lot less like the traditional "old-school" MMO that we have all pledged to.

     

    Pretty much sums up my thoughts

    Pantheon has never been pitched as having “Simplistic Combat”. To my knowledge it has always been pitched as low paced but strategic combat where group play was essential.

    States and synergies are the logical conclusion on how to have dynamic combat where choices mater an the whole is significantly greater than the sum of the parts.

    The “old-school” has always been in reference to the leveling difficulty and needing to group not a promise that it will basically be a re-skinned EQ with new IP.

     

    • 18 posts
    April 4, 2020 11:54 AM PDT

    Trasak said:

    Thump said:

    Fragile said:

    I don't see why there needs to be this super forced "synergy" when it will already exist from normal spells/abilities and class roles/dynamics. It honestly is looking a lot like feature/scope creep, and a lot less like the traditional "old-school" MMO that we have all pledged to.

     

    Pretty much sums up my thoughts

     

    Pantheon has never been pitched as having “Simplistic Combat”. To my knowledge it has always been pitched as low paced but strategic combat where group play was essential.

    States and synergies are the logical conclusion on how to have dynamic combat where choices mater an the whole is significantly greater than the sum of the parts.

    The “old-school” has always been in reference to the leveling difficulty and needing to group not a promise that it will basically be a re-skinned EQ with new IP.

     

     

    Pantheon was pitched started collecting funding as a SPIRITUAL successor to EQ giving the feeling of the old school MMORPG that EQ2 and Vanguard did not deliver. 

    But at this point we have none of the  team that started it we have been pushed off 2 years from when my pleages said we would have alpha

    I really hope we get a Fun game that at least I get the hundreds of dollars worth of play and enjoyment. 

    I think there is very little chance and I should have kept my money.

    Edit to SPIRITUAL from True success

    Adding  

    It was the  speed of combat  that made EQ for myself and others I know it gave the feeling  of playing D&D at you freinds house  you had time to get to know one another well chain killing it was not about how fast you could spam a rotation or trigger a combo. It was  about learning when to start the heal and how fast to heal as not to take hate or  run out of mana over healing. It was about learning when to cast that slow or nuke. when to time a stun to stop a complete heal and this all  happened at a pace that still worked with dial up and no  voice chat. Even as a bard  you could slip chat in well twisting 4 songs. 

    This is what has been lost with  dps and heal rotation active tanking because well doing these time sinks your not getting to know the people you are grouping with I did log into eq to get aa number 100 1000 or 2000 I didnt  due it to flag for Time. I had just as much fun  helping a guildie get  FBSS or farming spell runes. Some times I would  log on just  buff in PoK no donations just because no one else was and i havent seen that in any game post eq.

     

    Most of what bugs me is all the adding changing  stop adding stuff and (Fixing) what is not broken you said in 2018 we would have alpha before the end of the year PA4 was about to start  now where in Q2 2020 and your adding work to your project that does not need to be added.


    This post was edited by Vixx at April 4, 2020 9:28 PM PDT
    • 581 posts
    April 4, 2020 2:10 PM PDT

    Vixx said:

    Pantheon was pitched started collecting funding as athe true sucsessor to EQ giving the feeling of the old school MMORPG that EQ2 and Vanguard did not deliver.

    I'm sorry but that is incorrect. On the crowdfunder page as well as the first 'pantheonrotf' forums, the game descriptions didn't make any mention of Pantheon being like EQ in any way. Only in later years have I heard Devs call Pantheon "the SPIRITUAL successor" to EQ. (If you know of somewhere they did, feel free to link and show that I'm mistaken)

    Kickstarter          Pantheonrotf site Apr 2014

    I also have no doubt that had Pantheon been advertised as "the true successor to EQ" that Sony (and later Daybreak) would have had some serious concerns about Intellectual Property Rights and expressed them through their legal department.

    Lastly, (in my opinion) Vanguard had its share of problems, but lack of "old school feeling" wasn't one of them.

    • 39 posts
    April 4, 2020 2:53 PM PDT

    The new vulnerability, synergy, and potential combo component spell design reminds me of a different flavor of FFXI's skill-chains. It's weird because I believe in the past I've heard Joppa say that he's not a fan of that system, which is totally fine, but surprising given this new update. I'm hoping that it's taking the best of FFXI's system with a more EQ/Pantheon style of class coordination.


    This post was edited by Nesy at April 4, 2020 2:57 PM PDT
    • 132 posts
    April 4, 2020 6:49 PM PDT

    Zorkon said:

    Agreed some more. So in theory I'm a lvl 50 Wizard that decides to level up skinning and out of my hypothetical 1000 mana pool I need a level 50 spell costing 100 mana doing 500dps to kill that Bunny for the 50 Rabbit skins I'm going to need instead of loading up my old level 5 spell that cost 10 mana that can easily one shot the bunny... but instead I'm going to kill 10 bunnys and have to mana up.

    Or, as was pointed out... hold Shift, or Alt at for 50% cost so in that case, I can kill 20 bunny's before I'm OOM.

    That lvl 5 spell I could get all I needed with 50% of my mana left to spare.

    Next level in my Skinning I need Bear Skins.... I need to now load up a lvl 15 spell using 25 mana.

    AoE - You could just AoE down loads of them together for efficiency.

    Use Arcane - At that level difference you could easily use just an Arcane nuke, casting only that all the time will keep your stack of Arcane Power at 5, you'll have permanent mana regen and the level difference will mean the damage is still sufficient to one shot all the mobs.

    Engage with the community - Ask all the low level players to sell you their bunny skins for a certain price, you'll have dozens of newbies all over the zone coming to help you and make some money, it won't cost you much at all and you could gain your coin back quickly from level 50 quests and adventuring.

     

    I remember levelling up my Human Wizard as a total newbie to MMOs and RPGs back in 2001 in the East Commonlands, there used to be a few guys who would be there each day buying Spider Silk off us for 5p per stack. At level 8 this was a huge amount of money, I remember running all over the zone for the spiders trying to get a stack together then being able to buy all of the cloth armour I wanted, some more of my spells and a Cracked Staff!


    This post was edited by Ezrael at April 4, 2020 6:50 PM PDT
    • 114 posts
    April 4, 2020 7:48 PM PDT

    Pretty pleased over all with what was presented. Nothing too surprising I felt.

    The expansion on the synergy seem seems promising. I thought it might have some potential to make things interesting; as in not every group may have enery state available to them, meaning some groups will have different synergies, and thus may have slightly different sets of abilities they prefer to utilize as they play. I don't see that as a bad thing, thinking that "Oh we have class X now, that means I can use ability Y more effectively. Guess I'll swap out ability Z for it" might be the situation or something like that. I dunno, maybe I'm an optimist. I don't really see the addition of such a system as turning the game into a "twitch" combat rpg.

    Isn't such a system sort of a staple to a lot of RPG-style games, MMO and otherwise? Apply A to amplify the effect of B. Debuff the target to increase some effect on them. Even in D&D you could create synergies by doing things like casting Grease on a person and then igniting it to deal burn damage. Adding a little gravy onto that fundamental system, while hopefulling making it not a necessity for success, seems alright.

    • 18 posts
    April 4, 2020 9:44 PM PDT

    Jothany said:

    Vixx said:

    Pantheon was pitched started collecting funding as athe true sucsessor to EQ giving the feeling of the old school MMORPG that EQ2 and Vanguard did not deliver.

    I'm sorry but that is incorrect. On the crowdfunder page as well as the first 'pantheonrotf' forums, the game descriptions didn't make any mention of Pantheon being like EQ in any way. Only in later years have I heard Devs call Pantheon "the SPIRITUAL successor" to EQ. (If you know of somewhere they did, feel free to link and show that I'm mistaken)

    Kickstarter          Pantheonrotf site Apr 2014

    I also have no doubt that had Pantheon been advertised as "the true successor to EQ" that Sony (and later Daybreak) would have had some serious concerns about Intellectual Property Rights and expressed them through their legal department.

    Lastly, (in my opinion) Vanguard had its share of problems, but lack of "old school feeling" wasn't one of them.

     

    I was going off the 2017/2018 game play and what could have been done if they had followed there time line at that point.

    Vangaurd it had an old school feeling in a game that was full of broken New systems and poor optimization if it was good it would still be live and running. It is also why I hate to see them keep adding more to a system that works after 21 years.


    This post was edited by Vixx at April 4, 2020 9:50 PM PDT