Forums » News and Announcements

Catch Aradune and Joppa on the Gamespace GameShow at 7pm PDT

    • 523 posts
    May 22, 2018 9:15 AM PDT

    Porygon said:

    Mathir said:

    Anyway, my main point is that if they are going to sell the game as a quaternity, which they have been doing, they need to make the Control archetype equally represented with options as the other three archetypes (Healer, Tank, DPS)

     

    Could you cite any source or post where they said they are designing or marketing the game that way? Because I have never seen that. And the first time I ever heard that word was when you posted it.

    Also. What are the roles in this quaternity?  Because I assume you are just adding control to the trinity. Which in your own words includes pulling which most likely included monks.

    My tone is sometimes not received well in text form. But I dont mean any disrespect when i say. It honestly feels and looks like you're just fighting hard for a melee enchanter, or a bard that resembles what your fav character has been (dirge).

    Alot of what you're saying doesn't make sense because it seems you're excluding pulling classes (monk) from your "control archetype" when by your own accord pulling is a part of control. 

     

    The other folks beat me to the cite, been away a few days.  But, I mean, they talk about the quarternity aspect extensively all the time as a main marketing for this game.  Pretty much any Q&A or stream, it tends to come up, though not as much lately.  I hope that's just because it's known and not that they are backing away from it.

     

    "Pulling" is just something I am adding in because it was how I played that role, especially in EQ1.  However, good Enchanters and Bards were the best pullers due to their pacify/lull abilities coupled with being able to mez the mobs at the camp until the group was ready for the next mob.  Plus, both classes could pull with non-damage spells that helped with other mob aggro ranges that the Monks, SKs, and Rangers could not.  Those were fine pulling classes as well, but they weren't on par with the Enchanter and Bard for grouping.  In raids, monk pulling was excellent, though I was the primary puller for Hate (way, way back) as a SK and then later on as a Bard.  The Necro, with feign death and his undead lulls/long lasting snares, was fairly effective pulling as well, but he wasn't really designed as a control class as much as the other two were in EQ1.  My Dirge didn't pull as much on EQ2 in raids, but that's more a reflection of the instance layout.  So to be clear, pulling is not necessarily the sole area of a Control class, but it was an aspect I found fun in EQ1.  I don't consider it core to the Control role, but it is something I hope they can do well.  I really liked the EQ1 tool kit for both the Bard and Enchanter.  EQ2's Dirge took it to another level, but I doubt the Bard will be getting battle rezzing and some of the other fun things the EQ2 dirge could do.  I'm expecting more EQ1ish Control, but we'll see.  That's part of why I hope they have three options.  I love the Control role, but I want to be able to pick a class within it that fits my desires.  I know I don't want to be an Enchanter.  I like to be evil in game, and I generally like to wear armor and have some survivability.  Both the Bard and potentially the Necro appeal to me in the Control role.  Neither though are guaranteed to make it in at launch, which is annoying, and the Necro might not even be designed as Control, which I think would be a missed opportunity on multiple levels.

     

    Not sure if that cleared anything up or not, but I think you had the gist of it.  I do want a Melee, plate wearing option for a Control archetype.  I'd also like to see an evil control archetype with feign death.  I feel that along with the goody two shoes and squishy Enchanter, those other two options within the Control sphere would give a wide array of roleplay and playstyle choices.  Plus, if they are going to tout Control as being as important as healing, tanking, and DPS.  They do need to have at least as many options as those other roles have.  

    • 523 posts
    May 22, 2018 9:47 AM PDT

    asteldian said:

    Nothing of the quarternity sugggests the crowd control classes must be dedicated classes - everyone assumes as such thanks to previous experience, expectations and the fact the Enchanter is is what people expected (though even then in EQ1 days the Enchanter was much more than just CC) 

     

    It's a pet peeve of mine when folks associate the "Control" archetype with being crowd control (essentially Mez) only.  I just disagree with that.  I think it's a portion of the tool kit, but only a portion.  Slowing/haste, stat debuffs/buffs, fear/stun, and charm are all other aspects of the "Control" archetype and role.  Important ones.  Yes, Crowd Control is part of that kit, but it's not what the class is.  I agree with you on the EQ1 Enchanter, largely due to Charm and buffs, being much more than simply a CC class.  Control should mean controlling the entire pace of the battle and how many mobs you fight at a time.

     

    asteldian said: Crowd Control is a key part of the game, but clearly it is one that exists within the core roles and not limited to specific dedicated classes, so there is no need to make '3 classes as CC'.  Heck even the Enchanter you can argue is a party support class which has some CC (as opposed to Rogue who is DPS with CC).  Bard will similarly be party support with CC....a 3rd party support class seems unneccesarry and other classes can fulfill the CC role. 

     

    I disagree with you that they don't need at least three roles for the Control archetype.  They've touted this game as a quaternity and that Control is on par with the healers, tanks, and DPS classes.  While they do mix some Control aspects to other classes (especially the Shaman, which was OP in EQ1 and already looks OP in this game, but I digress), the Control archetypes should have ALL forms of control.  Each of the Enchanter, Bard, and Necromancer should have charm, stuns, fear, mez, excellent buffs, crippling debuffs, lulls/pacify, slows, and haste.  That's the Control archetype.  No other class in this game should have remotely all of those abilities.  The Control role is not damage, tanking, or healing focused.  It's as you said, party support, but that party support is mind-blowingly awesome, to the point that it makes up for not being healers, tanks, or DPS.  That's the entire concept of the quaternity.

    So, while Rogues get a short term CC, Shamans get slow, buffs, and debuffs, Rangers get animal mez and pacify, and there's more I'm sure I'm missing, but none of them get the entire kit that the control archetype gets.  Control is not spread throughout the classes, it is an entire archetype all to its own.

     

    asteldian said:

    Add in the fact there will be limited skill bar slots and you could well have a Rogue who has his whole set up primed for various Crowd Control and minimum damage.  Crowd control is not underrepresented, it simply isn't in the straight forward form of 'these 3 classes are your CC' and it makes sense because the CC factor is only ever a part of a class as a whole because otherwise they would be near worthless in a controlled situation where it is not required. 

    We're back to being hung up on Control simply meaning CC.  As stated previously, I think this is completely flawed.  It's a part of the kit.  And I'd argue the Rogue can't keep mobs locked down even close to as well as a dedicated Control class can.  That's going to be a fact.  Yes, he has AoE sleep and a limited duration smoke mez, but as we've seen in the streams, they can resist and it seems to have a long recast.  Plus, if it lands for full duration, it still runs out prior to the Rogue being able to recast.  It's a nice ability in a pinch, just like the Monk being able to tank in a pinch, but it doesn't replace the core archetypes.

     

    asteldian said:

    The Necro will be DPS, no doubt his CC factor will be related to undead, but he won't be a 'CC class' it will simply be a part of his bigger function - as a CC class he would be a weak link given his limitation of targets to effect so rather than put him in such a box he will be a fully performing class who has a function of CC. 

     

    Why on earth would the Necro be DPS?  They already have enough DPS classes, and they already have a pet DPS class in the Summoner.  The Necro struggled in EQ1, especially in groups and raids, because he didn't have a defined role.  He was essentially a mana twitch battery.  Build him up as a Control archetype.  His lore and spells make it easy.  In groups and raids he can have a defined role.  I personally think they should make him Control but let him heal through damage like the Blood Mage enough to at least be competent off heals if they specialize in that role.  But, we'll see what they do.

     

    I do think the limitation aspect is moot though.  They've already talked about the Paladin and his prowess against the Undead.  The Necro would just be a Control Archetype version of that.  Maybe he can't charm anything like an Enchanter could, perhaps the Bard only has a short term charm like in EQ1, but this could be rectified by summoning an undead pet, but allowing the Necro to charm more powerful undead when he's around those types of mobs.  Like the Paladin, he's solid in his core role at all times, but against Undead, he takes it up a notch.  In EQ1, the Cleric essentially became a wizard against the Undead.  So, they clearly have no problems letting certain classes dominate in certain areas while reverting back to normal in the other zones or encounters.  

     

     

    asteldian said:

    So the Crowd Control portion of the quarternity comes in a variety of flavours - did you want to DPS with your side of CC (Rogue, Ranger in a limited capacity, likely Necro vs Undead) or did you want party support with your CC (Enchanter, Bard).  There could even be a tank or Healer with a side of CC (in Vanguard the Dread Knight had a Mez function albeit limited)

     

    I want to play the Control role, not just CC.  I personally loved the EQ2 Dirge, I did zero DPS on raids.  I was too busy battle rezzing, mezzing, debuffing, buffing, stunning, silencing, and doing everything but DPS, healing, or tanking.  If I can't have all of that again, I'll gladly take the EQ1 Bard (Plate Armor, Slows, Hastes, Mez, Charm, Stun, Root, Fear, Snare, Buffs, Debuffs, lull/pacify, and some limited DPS to go along with being an elite puller).  So, generally I want a full blast Control class, and I think there should be at least three options like every other core archetype, and those can have a side of tanking, healing, or DPS.  Not the other way around.   It's a core, unique archetype.  

    • 76 posts
    May 22, 2018 1:13 PM PDT

    I agree. I do believe the control “archtype” as stated above should have three classes. I think it’s very logical to change up the necro a bit giving him the control kit (against undead) with a slice of dps And emergency healing. He would in no way replace a dps or healer but he could help.

     

    Meanwhile the other two obvious ones are bard and ench. I don’t think we need another form of main dps, tanking, or healing but instead a control role that can do some of those.

    • 3016 posts
    May 22, 2018 1:33 PM PDT

    Oh heck, darn poo..I missed it.   Been preoccupied packing things up..to move, whenever that is.

    • 1120 posts
    May 22, 2018 1:54 PM PDT

    Yea. I mean I definitely get your point.    Coming from a longtime eq history I have seen the benefits of great enchanters and also great monks.  I also played a necro and at times would pull at speeds that rivaled every class BUT bards.  

    I honestly have never seen the term quaternity nor heard it mentioned until you.  It's interesting that it's been in the FAQ the whole time lol.

    But back on point. I cannot imagine the hard being anything BUT a utility/CC class.  But I guess only time will tell.

    Also you can never have enough dps classes imo... especially if you sprinkle useful abilities into them (ie smoke and mirrors on a rogue).   I would LOVE to see the necro as a pure dps class aka the warlock from wow.  Fear was under utilized in eq because kiting was so much better.  I would love to see a class return that utilized fear.

    • 1479 posts
    May 22, 2018 2:00 PM PDT

    Well since there are estimated 1 tank, 1 healer, 1 "controler" and 3 dps, for 3 tanks and healers of choice you should have different DPS classes, which is way more than what will be avaliable at launch. Even if there are only 2 control classes, that means 6 DPS classes to get the equivalence of group repartition, but for now there are only 5 DPS classes, which means we will get a lot of redudancy in group composition, or a lot of doubles.

    • 523 posts
    May 22, 2018 2:40 PM PDT

    MauvaisOeil said:

    Well since there are estimated 1 tank, 1 healer, 1 "controler" and 3 dps, for 3 tanks and healers of choice you should have different DPS classes, which is way more than what will be avaliable at launch. Even if there are only 2 control classes, that means 6 DPS classes to get the equivalence of group repartition, but for now there are only 5 DPS classes, which means we will get a lot of redudancy in group composition, or a lot of doubles.

     

    I'm not sure this is the correct math, at least in terms of what will be required for a successful group.  I think it's absolutely safe to say the goal is one member each of the quaternity, so definitely a tank, a healer, a control, and a DPS.  I feel like we can lock that math in.  Do you have to always have one of each?  Probably not, but it's safe to assume that's the framework they are working with due to touting the quarternity aspect.

     

    So, that does leave two more spots.  I'm not convinced you have to have two DPS for those spots.  I think it's going to be pretty flexible based on group makeup.  In all the streams, they seem to easily have the most success with two tanks and two healers, a core DPS, and the Enchanter.  I'd argue the most successful group makeup so far is clearly Cleric, Shaman, Enchanter, Warrior, Rogue, and a second Warrior.  The Wizard and Monk haven't overly impressed to this point, but the Monk's toolkit suggests he can replace the offtank for group seeking more DPS.  It would make some sense to have the Bard be able to offtank in a pinch as well.  That would give flexibility in terms of two tanks, one tank/monk (dps/offtank), one tank/bard (control/offtank).  The Cleric can probably even do it in a pinch and that would round out the offtank options with a healer/offtank.   I think we can bank on most groups, especially against challenging content, requiring at least a class capable of offtanking or picking up a mob if the tank drops.  So, that would give us a group makeup of a tank, a healer, a control, a DPS, and an offtank.  

     

    I think from there, we just look at how challenging the streams have been, and it becomes pretty obvious you need offheals as well.  No matter what they do, the Cleric is going to look great as the main healer.  The Shaman has so much utility with his slows, debuffs, and dots that he makes the perfect off heal class.  We'll see what they do with the Druid, but early money is on reactive wards or healing through damage.  Now, the Paladin will have some heals, so he could be an option as a tank/offhealer.  Obviously another healer class can off heal.  But the issue becomes there is no current DPS or Control class that can off heal.  If they let the Necro heal through damage like a Blood Mage, then that creates an interesting off heal option, regardless of whether he is Control or DPS.  Maybe the answer is to have the Monk do some splash heals through his abilities like the Disciple.  His kit clearly has self healing capablities, but if he can have splash heals and the Necro is built as a control archetype, that gives legit off heal options to every member of the quaternity while rounding out group make up fairly well.

     

    Regardless, I actually don't see DPS as the answer for filling out the final two spots of a group.  In some cases, maybe, but it seems like have an offtank and off healer is more important based on what we've seen.  I think if DPS classes can fill those roles, and we know for sure the Monk can fill the offtank role, then it starts to make having three DPS archetypes more likely, but I know I'll be rolling with two healers in all my dungeon groups.  They need more options for off heals.  It can't just be another healer archetype or a Paladin.  If it is, then the healer archetype becomes the most important in the game.  Again. 

    • 1479 posts
    May 22, 2018 3:01 PM PDT

    Mathir said:

    MauvaisOeil said:

    Well since there are estimated 1 tank, 1 healer, 1 "controler" and 3 dps, for 3 tanks and healers of choice you should have different DPS classes, which is way more than what will be avaliable at launch. Even if there are only 2 control classes, that means 6 DPS classes to get the equivalence of group repartition, but for now there are only 5 DPS classes, which means we will get a lot of redudancy in group composition, or a lot of doubles.

     

    I'm not sure this is the correct math, at least in terms of what will be required for a successful group.  I think it's absolutely safe to say the goal is one member each of the quaternity, so definitely a tank, a healer, a control, and a DPS.  I feel like we can lock that math in.  Do you have to always have one of each?  Probably not, but it's safe to assume that's the framework they are working with due to touting the quarternity aspect.

     

    So, that does leave two more spots.  I'm not convinced you have to have two DPS for those spots.  I think it's going to be pretty flexible based on group makeup.  In all the streams, they seem to easily have the most success with two tanks and two healers, a core DPS, and the Enchanter.  I'd argue the most successful group makeup so far is clearly Cleric, Shaman, Enchanter, Warrior, Rogue, and a second Warrior.  The Wizard and Monk haven't overly impressed to this point, but the Monk's toolkit suggests he can replace the offtank for group seeking more DPS.  It would make some sense to have the Bard be able to offtank in a pinch as well.  That would give flexibility in terms of two tanks, one tank/monk (dps/offtank), one tank/bard (control/offtank).  The Cleric can probably even do it in a pinch and that would round out the offtank options with a healer/offtank.   I think we can bank on most groups, especially against challenging content, requiring at least a class capable of offtanking or picking up a mob if the tank drops.  So, that would give us a group makeup of a tank, a healer, a control, a DPS, and an offtank.  

     

    I think from there, we just look at how challenging the streams have been, and it becomes pretty obvious you need offheals as well.  No matter what they do, the Cleric is going to look great as the main healer.  The Shaman has so much utility with his slows, debuffs, and dots that he makes the perfect off heal class.  We'll see what they do with the Druid, but early money is on reactive wards or healing through damage.  Now, the Paladin will have some heals, so he could be an option as a tank/offhealer.  Obviously another healer class can off heal.  But the issue becomes there is no current DPS or Control class that can off heal.  If they let the Necro heal through damage like a Blood Mage, then that creates an interesting off heal option, regardless of whether he is Control or DPS.  Maybe the answer is to have the Monk do some splash heals through his abilities like the Disciple.  His kit clearly has self healing capablities, but if he can have splash heals and the Necro is built as a control archetype, that gives legit off heal options to every member of the quaternity while rounding out group make up fairly well.

     

    Regardless, I actually don't see DPS as the answer for filling out the final two spots of a group.  In some cases, maybe, but it seems like have an offtank and off healer is more important based on what we've seen.  I think if DPS classes can fill those roles, and we know for sure the Monk can fill the offtank role, then it starts to make having three DPS archetypes more likely, but I know I'll be rolling with two healers in all my dungeon groups.  They need more options for off heals.  It can't just be another healer archetype or a Paladin.  If it is, then the healer archetype becomes the most important in the game.  Again. 

     

    You and I will never agree on the DPS functionnality, even if the Fion Iridia kill showed that more DPS would have resulted in no death. I do not think stacking every tool of the trade to the expanse of damage will be a solution at all, especially if DPS classes bring tools additionnal to their single DPS role, like Smoke and mirror, feign death (and for the monk, the recently leaked taunt functionnality and survival cooldowns).

    Playing safe with multiple healers, tanks or controls might work but will possibly results in reaching exhaustion by some means, or multiplying the odds of a bad streak, for now we don't know because no numbers are final and game changing skills (smoke and mirrors, mez, absorbs) have a direct binairy results where some benefits are more subtle or more prone to number crunching before beeing released as they are. For now it's safe to assume "Groups will have some flexibility" but to what extent is yet unknown, as the damage contribution potentiel of most classes is not final or even known (Warriors seems quite unagressive for now, as an example, despite having a large choice of weapon setups).

    Damage classes are only 5, with only two casters at most, with or withouth nitpicking around possible concepts of 1 of each quarternity + fill whatever you feel fine over it, it's a role with greater needs and even greater occurencies, due to players choosing less stressfull, less crucial roles, even if there are only 2 DPS spots, they have less versatility than tanks and healers for now.

    • 1999 posts
    May 22, 2018 4:08 PM PDT

    Porygon said:

    I cannot imagine the hard being anything BUT a utility/CC class.  But I guess only time will tell.

    In Baz's interview at PAX with Joppa in April, where Joppa said he was 'confident' they could get Bard in by launch, Joppa confirmed positively that Bard would be another Control class.

     

    I think the current breakdown of how many classes there are in each role to possibly be more about the historical popularity of the classes, rather than a focus on the theoretical 'ideal' makeup of groups:

    There are 5 DPS classes because that has traditionally been the most popular role among players.

    Tanks and Healers have 3 each, equal to each other but less popular roles.

    Based on the 'popularity' perspective, I think that VR might have gone with fewer Control classes since they don't have an estimate yet on how popular the role will be. It's certainly good to offer some choices, but if the role turns out unpopular they at least minimize their losses by only developing 2 classes for it.

    Of course, if Necro turns out to be the 3rd Control class, then forget everyting I just said :D

     


    This post was edited by Jothany at May 22, 2018 4:08 PM PDT
    • 1120 posts
    May 23, 2018 8:31 AM PDT

    But that's the point.  Control should be defined as much more than just mezzing.  If a monk is able to single pull groups of mobs arent they "controlling" the fights?

    • 432 posts
    May 30, 2018 10:48 AM PDT
    Marthir,
    I just wanted yo point out we feel exactly the same with how cc means more than mez. However I wanted to give my perspective as lame as some may think it. Id go back to a trinity system and give tanks the cc tools like mez, slow, anything tjat impairs and disrupts and controlls the battle. I say this because I think it fits well for tanks. Also in a no threat system like pvp tanks are given yhese tools in other games.

    -Todd
    Ps writing while walking. Not even zpell checking. Woo!
    • 2756 posts
    August 18, 2018 2:41 AM PDT

    When I live stream maybe an hour or two later the recording is available.

    Why do these streams never have a recording available until days later?  :^(

    • 259 posts
    August 18, 2018 6:55 AM PDT

    Mispost


    This post was edited by Shyin at August 18, 2018 7:05 AM PDT