FOR GHOD'S SAKE, VERANT, HEAR THE WARRIOR'S CRY!
Desdinova
sucks!" or "This other class that I don't play is overpowered!" it's
pretty obvious that it's simply a "grass is greener" phenomenon. But
I've become convinced that the warriors in EQ really do get the shaft.
And this is without me ever having played a warrior past 2nd level.
Brad, I know you read this newsgroup occasionally, and I'm
hoping that you will read this message as well. There have been a lot
of spellslinger buffs over the past few patches, and I (for one) am
pretty damn pleased with the current state of my class (Mage). I
think it's time to lay off buffing the spellslingers and concentrate
on the warriors. Here are my suggestions, for what they're worth:
1) If you can't wear plate armor, you shouldn't be able to
wear magical plate armor. It's ridiculous that rogues, rangers, and
even monks can wear Green Splinted Platemail or Rubicite when they
can't wear normal plate. The whole justification for armor
limitations by class is that the skills necessary to move and fight
effectively while wearing Plate are vastly different than the skills
necessary to move and fight while wearing Leather. This is due partly
to the increased weight of Plate vs. Leather, but is also due partly
to the differences in flexibility of Leather vs. Plate and also due to
the overall "feel" of the armor. Even if Plate weighed the same as
Leather, it's still bulky and awkward, which is why (traditionally in
RPGs) only certain classes could wear plate.
Within the Everquest context specifically, it's simply
unbalancing. Let's say that I've got a party of 5 and we only have
room for one more player. I can pick either a 40th level Ranger in
Rubicite or a 40th level Warrior in Rubicite. Assume that both
players are skilled at playing their characters and that they're not
immature weens. Who do you choose? I think most people will choose
the ranger over the warrior. I mean, excellent tank with no spells
vs. excellent tank with moderate spells? Pretty easy decision to make
if everything else is equal.
If the ranger isn't wearing Rubicite, and is instead wearing
the most powerful Leather (or can they wear banded/ring/chain?) Armor
in the game, the decision becomes much less obvious. (Excellent tank
but no spells vs. moderate tank with moderate spells. Hrm. That
requires some thought.)
2) Warriors should be able to specialize in a melee skill much
like spellslingers can specialize in the casting skills. And it
should work the same way: Warriors should be able to specialize in all
weapons skills (except hand-to-hand and throwing, which should remain
the province of the Monks) up to 50, while picking one skill to exceed
50. The specialization should (A) decrease the delay time for using
the specialized weapon; and (B) provide either a damage bonus to all
hits or the possibility of a critical strike (doing quadruple damage).
The damage bonus would provide the possibility of hitting for
greater than max damage with each shot, as well as providing a minimum
"damage floor" to eliminate those pesky "You have slashed a_cyclops00
for 1 point of damage!" situations. The critical strike should be
something that has the possibility of happening with every blow, with
a <x> second delay before it's possible again after a successful
critical strike. I don't think any of these ideas would be
unbalancing. (I think the Critical Strike idea is the most appealing,
but I don't play a warrior so I could be wrong.) And warriors should
be the ONLY class that gets weapon specialization.
3) In a related vein, there should be at least one
Warrior-only weapon for each of the weapon skills. (i.e. there should
be at least one Warrior-only piercing weapon, at least one
Warrior-only 1H blunt weapon, etc.) This wouldn't be too terribly
game affecting, but it would allow for greater roleplay possibilities
(The warrior who's chosen to specialize in Piercing, for example).
Also, 1H Warrior-only weapons should NOT be Lore items, so that
warriors can dual-wield these weapons.
4) Warriors should NOT have their weapon skills capped at 200.
This is just absurd, especially considering that they're touted as the
"masters of melee", and especially considering that Monks can advance
to 255. This is logically justifiable within the game context; Shadow
Knights, Paladins, Rangers and Rogues are given other abilities to
rely on (Harm Touch, Backstab, Spells) to supplement their weapon
skills, and as a consequence they don't invest the same effort and
energy into increasing their weapon skills as do Warriors. Warriors
have nothing else to rely on BUT their skill-at-arms. So they clearly
have more interest in developing their skills to the maximum of human
possibility. Raise the weapon skill cap (and the Offense and Defense
skill cap) to 255 for the Warriors.
5) Finally, Warriors (and possibly Rogues) should be allowed
to use bandages and the bind wound skill beyond the 50% health cap.
Again, this is logically justifiable within the game context; what
other class besides warriors would be so keen to learn this skill?
Makes perfect sense. Spellslingers won't know the subtle wound
binding tricks to heal themselves past 50% health because in most
cases they either survive the battle with a nearly full health bar or
they die. The Healing classes never bothered to learn these subtle
tricks because they have healing spells. Paladins have Lay on Hands,
Rangers have Healing, Monks have Mend, Shadow Knights have
lifetap-type spells, and Bards have healing-accelerating songs, so
none of these classes ever bothered to learn the subtle tricks of
binding wounds past 50%. Only Warriors (and possibly Rogues) have
nothing else to rely on but their ability to manually patch themselves
up after a tough scrape, and so it should be perfectly feasible for
them to heal themselves (or, indeed, others) beyond 50% with mere
bandages and the bind wounds skill.
For those who fear that this would make the Healer classes
less useful, keep in mind that the max number of points you can heal
at any time with the bind wounds skill is 20 (or 30 -- I've heard
both), and it takes about 5 seconds. Certainly not useful in combat,
especially when the warrior is being tagged for over 100 hits in a
5-second period of time.
I don't think any of these suggestions would unbalance the
game or make the Warriors too powerful. It *would* make them a more
interesting, more viable class to play.
Desdinova
Humble Erudite Conjurer of the 4th Circle
Innoruuk
Alex Dalis
magical plate is kinda overkill. It is magical plate put simply, and
that is why they can wear it. Also it is not normally available unless
you are pretty high level (30's). So the majority of classes that can't
wear plate have to work pretty damn hard to get it. whereas warriors
can purchace bronze at a much lower level (around 15th).
Shane Bole
bows?
Fabno (level 12 Erudite Enchanter, E. Marr)
Fammuin (level 6 Erudite Cleric, E. Marr)
Kinudor (level 8 Barbarian Warrior, E. Marr)
(screw my rallos zek characters)
Alex Dalis <dal...@mitre.org> wrote in message
news:375FDDED...@mitre.org...
Ben King
send the post via email to Verant/Brad.
-Ben
Desdinova <abu...@erols.com> wrote in article
<375fc305....@news.rcn.com>...
<snip great warrior suggestions by a non warrior>
Alex Dalis
true nature of Rubicite and Splinted. I think they just look like plate
and are some weird type of material. There can be any number of mystical
magic reasons that could make rangers or other classes able to wear
these types of armor. Plus i've been looking forward to some new colors.
These brown armor types just don't attrack as many females as I would
like. I think i need something more flashy, like the famed "pimps
feather" worn in the head slot this item adds +10 cha and 5 charges of
charm person. muhahaha
Dundee
> Normally when I read posts from people saying "My class
>sucks!" or "This other class that I don't play is overpowered!" it's
>pretty obvious that it's simply a "grass is greener" phenomenon.
>But I've become convinced that the warriors in EQ really do get the shaft.
>And this is without me ever having played a warrior past 2nd level.
Ahhhh you have finally seen the light. It's *not* a grass-is-greener
thing. If it were, we'd all quit playing whatever class we think
sucks and we'd *go over to that greener grass*.
> 1) If you can't wear plate armor, you shouldn't be able to
>wear magical plate armor. It's ridiculous that rogues, rangers, and
>even monks can wear Green Splinted Platemail or Rubicite when they
>can't wear normal plate.
Monks can't wear rubicite any more.
> 4) Warriors should NOT have their weapon skills capped at 200.
>This is just absurd, especially considering that they're touted as the
>"masters of melee", and especially considering that Monks can advance
>to 255.
To 255, but without ever weilding any weapon at all. And there are
some nice magic weapons out there.
Problem is, I think, that those weapons aren't warrior-only (and
should be).
> I don't think any of these suggestions would unbalance the
>game or make the Warriors too powerful. It *would* make them a more
>interesting, more viable class to play.
I dunno... Warriors and Monks seem pretty well balanced to me so far
in terms of their ability to do damage and take damage. Its when
compared to all the other classes that they look pathetic.
I sure hope they stick to their "but they take less xp than other
classes and you should have been a <insert class here> anyway" policy
of game balance.
--
Dundee - http://dundee.uong.com/
Desdinova
>Ahhhh you have finally seen the light. It's *not* a grass-is-greener
>thing.
It is for most posters and most classes, IMHO.
>If it were, we'd all quit playing whatever class we think
>sucks and we'd *go over to that greener grass*.
Nah. That requires effort. Bitching is easier. :)
JayForsest
The fighter class is being abused compared to other classes. Your
recommendations seem reasonable and fair. Fighters need something to balance
them so they can become the masters of fighting.
Dundee
>>If it were, we'd all quit playing whatever class we think
>>sucks and we'd *go over to that greener grass*.
>
> Nah. That requires effort. Bitching is easier. :)
Takes no more effort to start a good class than it does to start a
gimpy one.
I think what people are really saying is, "I want to play what I want
to play, and I don't want it to *suck*."
Charles B. Naumann
The whole point is that warriors need SOMETHING to define them.
Something that no other class has or can get. Something useful!
Something fun! Not something like being the only class to be
able to use bronze weapons.
BTW, I have seen plenty of small Bronze plate, but I am cluesss
as to where med and large bronze plate can be obtained be a
level 15 warrior. Please either post or email details.
Charles Naumann
Alex Dalis <dal...@mitre.org> wrote:
: the bit about the rangers and other classes not being able to wear
: magical plate is kinda overkill. It is magical plate put simply, and
Dundee
<cnau...@HiWAAY.net> wrote:
>
>The whole point is that warriors need SOMETHING to define them.
>Something that no other class has or can get. Something useful!
>Something fun! Not something like being the only class to be
>able to use bronze weapons.
I think if they were the only best melee class, that'd be good enough.
Problem is... they aren't. They're boring and simple and die a lot.
They don't do much more damage (if any) than anyone else, they can't
take much more damage (or even more damage, period, really) than
anyone else. And there's absolutely no point whatsoever to their even
existing.
Dennis posted that if he was in charge of The Troops he'd train the
druids in archery and send the paladins and rangers home. I thought
that was funny because you notice who wasn't even invited in the first
place? heh.
But you can't say anything about anything in EQ because that's all
just "the grass is greener" whining. The game is perfect and all the
classes are "balanced" so that not a single one is better than any
other.
Yeah.
Thanos
wrote:
>the bit about the rangers and other classes not being able to wear
>magical plate is kinda overkill. It is magical plate put simply, and
>that is why they can wear it. Also it is not normally available unless
>you are pretty high level (30's). So the majority of classes that can't
>wear plate have to work pretty damn hard to get it. whereas warriors
>can purchace bronze at a much lower level (around 15th).
Ahh yes but if at level 40 plus all of you have spells PLUS plate
armour.What good is a warrior anymore?
Ben K. Krauskopf
I've played both. I have a 10th level barbarian warrior and a 9th
level half-elf ranger, both on Innoruk (and both have met SirJay down
in Blackburrow <G>), and I agree. Temyed really isn't a worse fighter
(despite being weaker by about 40 points, but I put a lot into
Thorvald's Agi and Dex on the theory that hitting more often and
getting hit less was good so there isn't much discrepency there) and he
has lots of nifty extras. Thorvald is really kinda boring as a
warrior. He whacks stuff, but not really any better than any of the
hybrids and he doesn't get any compensation for that. Except for
getting to spend a LOT of time healing that is...
--
Ben Krauskopf
ben...@texas.net
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Jim Williams
historic context (and with the race war server coming up (?) specialization
in war should become an issue.)
The Mongols used silk armor vs the Euro knights chain and plat. The arrows
from their recurved bows fired quickly, an were a bitch to get out of the
knight's armor. The arrows fired by the Euro knights were seldom fired by
longbows, and even crossbow bolts would tend to recoil from the armor of the
mongols, not penetrating too deeply, and being easily removed.
Plate armor was the cause of death of most of the French combatants at
Agincourt. Henry drove in stakes to stop the cavalry, lined up his
longbowmen, and when the French knights charged across a muddy field, the
longbow arrows knocked them down into the mud, where most of them drowned.
They couldn't get up for the weight of their armor.
Then there's the case of Seutonius and his 10,000 legionnaires against a
quarter million celtic barbarians under Boadicca. I don't know how Verant
could model the discipline and efficiency of a soldier vs a warrior, in the
warrior class. But warriors teamed up with tower shields, gladius, pila
(throwing spear) should fight better than a solo warrior with a targ and
mino axe.
Try envisioning a modern campaign without air power; not many pilots make
good ground-pounders, though. I think, actually, modern arms give an even
better example of the integrated aspects of campaign warfare (which is
basically what "doing" crushbone or unrest is...) artillary (rangers,
wizards, magicians) armored corps (warriors, paladins,) infantry (rogues,
rangers, clerics, shaman, monks,) air support (wizards, druids, enchanters,
magicians,) and of course logistics and communications (wizards, druids,
Magicians) sappers (dunno... not much to destroy or build in EQ,) scouts,
spies (rogues, rangers, druids, enchanters) corpsmen, medics.... hello
clerics...
Dundee wrote in message
<843E0FD6AFA9256B.522BBBCB...@lp.airnews.net>...
Jim Williams
two I want to play, and will never ever be able to play them :(
A slingshot wielding dwarf warrior that I can name Bobo (my hero)
A two-headed knife-throwing giant that I can name Joe-Jim McGregor. Oh, and
I want to be able to "speak" as either head, and have them argue with each
other too.
A two-headed barbarian would do, but then he'd have to be a shaman not a
warrior.
I'd even become a guide to have either/both of them, even if I had to give
up my existing characters (hint hint Brad....)
(PS - dear God,
please don't let Verhoven get anywhere near touching "Orphans of the Sky"
and turn it into some sexed up bug blast...)
Dundee wrote in message
<54433AC0A2660ED1.07DF4480...@lp.airnews.net>...
Dennis Francis Heffernan
|Dennis posted that if he was in charge of The Troops he'd train the
|druids in archery and send the paladins and rangers home. I thought
|that was funny because you notice who wasn't even invited in the first
|place? heh.
Well, that's because Karana's minions don't have Warriors in the ranks.
But then, if I were in charge, I still wouldn't invite any.
Dennis F. Heffernan EQ: Venture (E'ci) dfra...@email.com
Montclair State U #include <disclaim.h> ICQ:9154048 CompSci/Philosophy
"There's no easy way to be free."
-- Pete Townshend, "Slip Kid"
JubJub McRae
DAMMIT!!!! Half of the time they don't even look at the grass on the
other side of the fence.
Charles B. Naumann
Hehe. Maybe Verant modeled things just a little too well!
Charles Naumann
Jim Williams <am...@ionet.net> wrote:
: Funny about the troops comment. I was just thinking about that in an
:>On Thu, 10 Jun 1999 13:59:20 -0500, "Charles B. Naumann"
:><cnau...@HiWAAY.net> wrote:
:>
:>>
:>>The whole point is that warriors need SOMETHING to define them.
:>>Something that no other class has or can get. Something useful!
:>>Something fun! Not something like being the only class to be
:>>able to use bronze weapons.
:>
:>I think if they were the only best melee class, that'd be good enough.
:>
:>Problem is... they aren't. They're boring and simple and die a lot.
:>They don't do much more damage (if any) than anyone else, they can't
:>take much more damage (or even more damage, period, really) than
:>anyone else. And there's absolutely no point whatsoever to their even
:>existing.
:>
:>Dennis posted that if he was in charge of The Troops he'd train the
:>druids in archery and send the paladins and rangers home. I thought
:>that was funny because you notice who wasn't even invited in the first
:>place? heh.
:>
:>But you can't say anything about anything in EQ because that's all
:>just "the grass is greener" whining. The game is perfect and all the
:>classes are "balanced" so that not a single one is better than any
:>other.
:>
:>Yeah.
:>
:>--
:>Dundee - http://dundee.uong.com/
Jim Williams
JubJub McRae wrote in message <37633968...@news.ne.mediaone.net>...
Desdinova
>Takes no more effort to start a good class than it does to start a
>gimpy one.
But it takes more effort to get a new character up to 10th
level than it does to keep playing your current 10th level character
and just bitch about it.
>I think what people are really saying is, "I want to play what I want
>to play, and I don't want it to *suck*."
I have no doubt that this is what they're saying. I just
think their definition of "suck" is far too broad. Unless it allows
them to be the kewl insta-death tankmage, then it "sucks" in their
eyes.
There are a few classes that are clearly broken (rogues, for
example) that will be MUCH more fun to play when they're fixed (i.e.
Rogue Make Poison skill). There is only one class (IMHO) that works
as it was designed to work and still sucks: the Warrior.
Ferror
255. But anyways i wan't to start a petition i have a web page. If i can
get someone to post it on eqvault what we are doing etc. (i pissed of
every guy on eqvault so i can't get news trough.) We need the warrior
top be balanced i was happy till this woodelf ranger challenged me to a
duel he was the same level with pw armor and a bastard, I had much
better everything leather armor and a mino axe and a kite shield. I
dueled him and he started healing himself that damn bastard. Everytime i
got over 10% hp off him he casted a heal spell. So whgo do you think
won? Ok now if you want to make a webpage petitioning we warrior could
have asomething that let's us stand out and no other class could have
please email me at mailto:je...@home.com i will get your email and after
9 emails i'll start the webpage everyday updating it with new emails
that people have sent. That is how we got the rp switch:) Oh yah and as
i said before we need someone that could post it up on eqvault.
--
---------------------------------
formely known as jez
---------------------------------
Silly Willy
I think to fix the problem of Warriors being so crappy at melee compared to
other classes, and just plain crappy compared to any other class, they need
to add a Tripple Attack at level 35. That way:
1> They will most definately be the best melee class. In time.
2> It wont be overbalanced. Everyone EXPECTS Warriors to deal major amounts of
damage with weapons. At those levels, it will be a nice added bonus, but not
something overly powerfull compared to other classes.
3> They will catch up with all those F^&KING mages with the LAME DOT spells in
sheer damage.