I want every encounter to be challenging. From the lowliest wandering monster up to the largest raid boss, nothing should ever be so simple or so easy for it's level that we don't have to think to beat it.
I want to see real differences between players of the same class based on meaningful choices. Gear selection, spell selection, ability use - all options should be viable in different ways, and players should have the flexibility to play uniquely from each other.
I want to see true group dynamics. The whole should be greater than the sum of its parts because of the interaction of everyone's skills and abilities. A group with a shaman healing should work differently than a group with a druid or cleric healing, but still be just as effective. There should never be a single standard for group composition, or required classes, and instead, players should be able to make different combinations work just as effectively, simply by leveraging different sets of synergies within their groups.
Nephele said:I want every encounter to be challenging. From the lowliest wandering monster up to the largest raid boss, nothing should ever be so simple or so easy for it's level that we don't have to think to beat it.
I want to see real differences between players of the same class based on meaningful choices. Gear selection, spell selection, ability use - all options should be viable in different ways, and players should have the flexibility to play uniquely from each other.
I want to see true group dynamics. The whole should be greater than the sum of its parts because of the interaction of everyone's skills and abilities. A group with a shaman healing should work differently than a group with a druid or cleric healing, but still be just as effective. There should never be a single standard for group composition, or required classes, and instead, players should be able to make different combinations work just as effectively, simply by leveraging different sets of synergies within their groups.
i see you are a fellow pvper :D let's orchestrate a symphony of blood and make them eat cake ^_^
LOL stellarmind. I enjoy PvP in the way that I enjoy grand strategy games. When my army guild crushes my enemies, drives them from the land, and plunders their strongholds, I am happy.
Chasing some trash talking idiot around while he bunny hops incessantly trying to avoid being targeted, not so much.
Suffice to say I don't tend to PvP much in fantasy MMOs, unless you count the economic PvP that is crafting, sometimes ;)
Nephele said:LOL stellarmind. I enjoy PvP in the way that I enjoy grand strategy games. When my army guild crushes my enemies, drives them from the land, and plunders their strongholds, I am happy.
Chasing some trash talking idiot around while he bunny hops incessantly trying to avoid being targeted, not so much.
Suffice to say I don't tend to PvP much in fantasy MMOs, unless you count the economic PvP that is crafting, sometimes ;)
small elite guild like spartas or large zerg guilds like persia?
Nephele said:I like to think of it in terms of Roman Imperial Legions. Legionaries are highly trained, well equipped, and skilled, but sometimes, you need all the Auxiliaries on the field to provide support as well.
much more refined than me XD.
i prefer guerilla warfare. death by a thousand cuts. jazz.
i'm content with a surgical approach from time to time. there is something to be said about the precision and timing of a well machined orchestra.
never was a fan of the mass chanting of savages with no taste and a thought of their own. they are no different from a horde of npcs being trained through a dungeon, however, i can appreciate the magnificence of chaos. it's quite beautiful to see :o
((I want every encounter to be challenging. From the lowliest wandering monster up to the largest raid boss, nothing should ever be so simple or so easy for it's level that we don't have to think to beat it.))
I very much disagree. If a good group with at least decent gear and some skill is needed to beat a major raid or dungeon boss - the only way that wandering trash can be challenging for them is if a partial group (two or three characters for example) or a group with poor gear or a group with inexperienced or simply below average players would find that same wandering trash to be the enemies from hell - totally unbeatable.
Trash or even lesser bosses should be relatively trivial for the hypothetical well balanced and geared group so that groups and players that aren't as well developed can also play the game and gain the experience and gear that one day may advance them to become an A-list group.
If Pantheon was instanced - may all Gods forbid - all enemies could be suitable for any group that encountered them. But in landscape that needs to be playable for everyone - and keep in mind that approximately half the players will have below average skill, not to mention experience and gear - trash mobs need to be ...trash.
dorotea said:((I want every encounter to be challenging. From the lowliest wandering monster up to the largest raid boss, nothing should ever be so simple or so easy for it's level that we don't have to think to beat it.))
I very much disagree. If a good group with at least decent gear and some skill is needed to beat a major raid or dungeon boss - the only way that wandering trash can be challenging for them is if a partial group (two or three characters for example) or a group with poor gear or a group with inexperienced or simply below average players would find that same wandering trash to be the enemies from hell - totally unbeatable.
Trash or even lesser bosses should be relatively trivial for the hypothetical well balanced and geared group so that groups and players that aren't as well developed can also play the game and gain the experience and gear that one day may advance them to become an A-list group.
If Pantheon was instanced - may all Gods forbid - all enemies could be suitable for any group that encountered them. But in landscape that needs to be playable for everyone - and keep in mind that approximately half the players will have below average skill, not to mention experience and gear - trash mobs need to be ...trash.
aww let a masochist dream. this sadist loves to watch ^_^
dorotea said:((I want every encounter to be challenging. From the lowliest wandering monster up to the largest raid boss, nothing should ever be so simple or so easy for it's level that we don't have to think to beat it.))
I very much disagree. If a good group with at least decent gear and some skill is needed to beat a major raid or dungeon boss - the only way that wandering trash can be challenging for them is if a partial group (two or three characters for example) or a group with poor gear or a group with inexperienced or simply below average players would find that same wandering trash to be the enemies from hell - totally unbeatable.
Trash or even lesser bosses should be relatively trivial for the hypothetical well balanced and geared group so that groups and players that aren't as well developed can also play the game and gain the experience and gear that one day may advance them to become an A-list group.
If Pantheon was instanced - may all Gods forbid - all enemies could be suitable for any group that encountered them. But in landscape that needs to be playable for everyone - and keep in mind that approximately half the players will have below average skill, not to mention experience and gear - trash mobs need to be ...trash.
I understand where you're coming from dorotea but I think a lot of that actually depends on just how much gear influences the results of combat. In many other MMOs, getting a gear upgrade makes a significant difference in terms of combat effectiveness - I would argue, too significant in many cases. I would much rather see a situation in Pantheon where that gear upgrade makes a small (but noticeable) difference, but does not drastically decrease the challenge of an encounter.
I suppose you could say this is one of the few things that I want to pull in from EverQuest. In EQ, gear upgrades were valuable but they weren't overpowering. They might let you do slightly more damage or take slightly less damage or get one more heal in before you ran out of mana, but they did not allow you to ignore the fact that you needed to interrupt a cast, or snare a runner, or do some kind of CC on the adds. Compare that to modern games where overgearing encounters strips all the challenge out of them. So, in this one area of gear interaction with player power, I think we actually should be looking very heavily at EQ and how that aspect of the game worked.
"Trash" is a four letter word to me when it comes to area and encounter design. That's just my personal opinion on it, but if something is only going to be a trivial speedbump for "well geared, coordinated players", I'd just rather that it not exist at all. Or really, what I'd rather is that it not be a trivial speedbump, and that players who are not well geared or coordinated are more encouraged to work on those aspects of gameplay. Not in an extreme sense, but more in a "hey, this content is meant to be challenging" sense.
@dorotea
I think Neph was referring more to a “challenge for the intended challenger”. Trash mobs would be very hard to solo. Group mobs would require a good class balance but that balance can be achieved in multiple ways. Raids will require intelligent application of abilities across all classes to respond to a complex and evolving encounter. Out leveling the intended content will obviously also trivialize content unless . . .
. . . Character have logarithmic power growth by level rather than linear or exponential. Right along side with mass/volume inventory systems and time bottlenecked crafting systems log power growth is the cure for what ails MMOs.
If character did not gain more than a 50% increase in the magnitude of abilities from the middle level to the max level then no content mid level and above would ever be truly trivial. Likewise all content could theoretically be approached by mid level characters though the chance of success outside if a zerg 1000 strong would be low.
Increasing in level increases the number of abilities you have that in turn activate or take advantage of synergies with other classes. Mobs go from generic to specialized, requiring both specialized attacks and defenses to fully engage the target without penalties. These specialized attacks and defenses could be both from equipment and utilizing synergies.
The higher the level of content the greater the relative gap is between a full group and a single target. The higher level content will still end up being exclusive to either the very skilled or the very well-equipped or maybe even both but the numbers will be at most twice what were seen at the mid levels rather than 10 or 100 times greater. In this way 90% of the content created can be for lvls 25+ and all of it will be non trivial at level 50.
Another way to explain my first point in terms of encounter design is that every mob should have a "trick". Nothing should be defined ONLY in terms of its hp and damage.
Maybe the mob has a DoT that it does, that must be cured.
Maybe it casts a very damaging spell that must be interrupted.
Maybe it has a knockback attack, or a knockdown, or a stun that it can do.
Maybe it's stealthed until it attacks.
Maybe it gets stronger as more mobs of its type are nearby.
Maybe it is highly resistant to certain damage types, but vulnerable to others.
Maybe it has very high evasion against physical attacks but low resistance to magical attacks.
Maybe it will try to run early and come back with friends.
Maybe it will call for help from other nearby mobs unless it is interrupted.
.... and so on.
The point is, challenge isn't only defined just in terms of hit points and damage, but by the different abilities and actions and factors of the fight. If we want to retain challenge, players need to be required to respond to those factors in some way in order to win efficiently. Any time players can simply brute force their way through an encounter and ignore what the mob is doing, for whatever reason, something is wrong.
Nephele said:Another way to explain my first point in terms of encounter design is that every mob should have a "trick". Nothing should be defined ONLY in terms of its hp and damage.
Maybe the mob has a DoT that it does, that must be cured.
Maybe it casts a very damaging spell that must be interrupted.
Maybe it has a knockback attack, or a knockdown, or a stun that it can do.
Maybe it's stealthed until it attacks.
Maybe it gets stronger as more mobs of its type are nearby.
Maybe it is highly resistant to certain damage types, but vulnerable to others.
Maybe it has very high evasion against physical attacks but low resistance to magical attacks.
Maybe it will try to run early and come back with friends.
Maybe it will call for help from other nearby mobs unless it is interrupted.
.... and so on.
The point is, challenge isn't only defined just in terms of hit points and damage, but by the different abilities and actions and factors of the fight. If we want to retain challenge, players need to be required to respond to those factors in some way in order to win efficiently. Any time players can simply brute force their way through an encounter and ignore what the mob is doing, for whatever reason, something is wrong.
This. What I don't want to see is hack, slash, cast, rinse, repeat. I don't want it to come down to purely damage numbers and gear. I want to have to think, at least a little. When it's simply a matter of having BiS gear to faceroll everything, it's boring. I want each class to be engaged instead of just mindlessly auto attacking.
Love this, we need this kind of game, if players just want to face tank everything including trash literally every single mmo does this alrdy let's have a better game, well said neph
that's the purpose of dispositions XD
the psychology of fighting games is that humans generate a flow chart.
depending on whos flow chart is better suited for the given matchup, assuming that execution is equal, we can define a victor majority of the time through metrics.
this flow chart is what made humans players unique. we could generate new scenarios and remove the ones to increase our process.
this is no longer the case with algorthims. ai can generate, execute and simulate much better than us.
individual ais working together for mobas is quite amazing.
that's the level of sophistication we are at and this is just with GAMING.
i say humans, in most cases, can only account for 2 outcomes in a given scenario. ai... well it's alot more than 2 >.>
it's funny on how we define challenge. what one may find fun, another may find too difficult.
i'm no brad mcquaid here, but as a creative designer, you'd have to give players a 3/4 success chance when dealing with 'normal' enemies. bosses at 1/4 success rate.
could you imagine how many players would just give up if mobs had a 1/2 win ratio against a human?
suppose you introduce a group disposition where mobs worked in tandem.
that ratio you'd think would drop, favoring the player, but it's not the case because 2 players are more likely to have difference of opinion, approach and execution.
i mean if i don't like pvp, the suggested system is not going to be fun for the average pver.
you'd have to severely limit the flow chart of a mob.
haha i could imagine doing a boss and it's so smart that it understands a raid composition and completely changes the encounter to favor it XD: they are clumping here. the raid leader likely will shift the raid to the left to avoid the aoe. under stressful conditions, he delays his order by 2 seconds. shift aoe window by 4 seconds earlier. wipe raid. my treasures and life stays safe.
stellarmind said:that's the purpose of dispositions XD
the psychology of fighting games is that humans generate a flow chart.
depending on whos flow chart is better suited for the given matchup, assuming that execution is equal, we can define a victor majority of the time through metrics.
this flow chart is what made humans players unique. we could generate new scenarios and remove the ones to increase our process.
this is no longer the case with algorthims. ai can generate, execute and simulate much better than us.
individual ais working together for mobas is quite amazing.
that's the level of sophistication we are at and this is just with GAMING.
i say humans, in most cases, can only account for 2 outcomes in a given scenario. ai... well it's alot more than 2 >.>
it's funny on how we define challenge. what one may find fun, another may find too difficult.
i'm no brad mcquaid here, but as a creative designer, you'd have to give players a 3/4 success chance when dealing with 'normal' enemies. bosses at 1/4 success rate.
could you imagine how many players would just give up if mobs had a 1/2 win ratio against a human?
suppose you introduce a group disposition where mobs worked in tandem.
that ratio you'd think would drop, favoring the player, but it's not the case because 2 players are more likely to have difference of opinion, approach and execution.
i mean if i don't like pvp, the suggested system is not going to be fun for the average pver.
you'd have to severely limit the flow chart of a mob.
haha i could imagine doing a boss and it's so smart that it understands a raid composition and completely changes the encounter to favor it XD: they are clumping here. the raid leader likely will shift the raid to the left to avoid the aoe. under stressful conditions, he delays his order by 2 seconds. shift aoe window by 4 seconds earlier. wipe raid. my treasures and life stays safe.
Or the raid boss sees they have 5 healers, and ignores the tank, kills their healers and watch their raid panicky while he's roflhao while easily smashing the rest of them slowly because he doesn't want me to raided lol.
This is joking btw in no way would this ever be fun, just funny to write.
Riahuf22 said:stellarmind said:that's the purpose of dispositions XD
the psychology of fighting games is that humans generate a flow chart.
depending on whos flow chart is better suited for the given matchup, assuming that execution is equal, we can define a victor majority of the time through metrics.
this flow chart is what made humans players unique. we could generate new scenarios and remove the ones to increase our process.
this is no longer the case with algorthims. ai can generate, execute and simulate much better than us.
individual ais working together for mobas is quite amazing.
that's the level of sophistication we are at and this is just with GAMING.
i say humans, in most cases, can only account for 2 outcomes in a given scenario. ai... well it's alot more than 2 >.>
it's funny on how we define challenge. what one may find fun, another may find too difficult.
i'm no brad mcquaid here, but as a creative designer, you'd have to give players a 3/4 success chance when dealing with 'normal' enemies. bosses at 1/4 success rate.
could you imagine how many players would just give up if mobs had a 1/2 win ratio against a human?
suppose you introduce a group disposition where mobs worked in tandem.
that ratio you'd think would drop, favoring the player, but it's not the case because 2 players are more likely to have difference of opinion, approach and execution.
i mean if i don't like pvp, the suggested system is not going to be fun for the average pver.
you'd have to severely limit the flow chart of a mob.
haha i could imagine doing a boss and it's so smart that it understands a raid composition and completely changes the encounter to favor it XD: they are clumping here. the raid leader likely will shift the raid to the left to avoid the aoe. under stressful conditions, he delays his order by 2 seconds. shift aoe window by 4 seconds earlier. wipe raid. my treasures and life stays safe.
Or the raid boss sees they have 5 healers, and ignores the tank, kills their healers and watch their raid panicky while he's roflhao while easily smashing the rest of them slowly because he doesn't want me to raided lol.
This is joking btw in no way would this ever be fun, just funny to write.
this is what you do in pvp. if the healers are too difficult to kill, you cc the healers kill the tanks, then proceed to 1-2 shot all the dps.
dorotea said:((I want every encounter to be challenging. From the lowliest wandering monster up to the largest raid boss, nothing should ever be so simple or so easy for it's level that we don't have to think to beat it.))
I very much disagree. If a good group with at least decent gear and some skill is needed to beat a major raid or dungeon boss - the only way that wandering trash can be challenging for them is if a partial group (two or three characters for example) or a group with poor gear or a group with inexperienced or simply below average players would find that same wandering trash to be the enemies from hell - totally unbeatable.
Trash or even lesser bosses should be relatively trivial for the hypothetical well balanced and geared group so that groups and players that aren't as well developed can also play the game and gain the experience and gear that one day may advance them to become an A-list group.
If Pantheon was instanced - may all Gods forbid - all enemies could be suitable for any group that encountered them. But in landscape that needs to be playable for everyone - and keep in mind that approximately half the players will have below average skill, not to mention experience and gear - trash mobs need to be ...trash.
I don't really see the problem with that being the case, that a partial group or group with poor gear/lack of experience would find some mobs to be enemies from hell or unbeatable. Those players who find themselves lacking can always go to different areas and/or fight lower con mobs until they sort themselves out. I feel common or "trash" mobs of appropriate level to a group should be a real challenge/threat for a well balanced group.
The notion that anything should be trivial is absurd to me. For the majority of the game players can very well choose their difficulty, if they want trivial means to level then they can farm light blue/blue con mobs to the end of time.
Iksar said:dorotea said:((I want every encounter to be challenging. From the lowliest wandering monster up to the largest raid boss, nothing should ever be so simple or so easy for it's level that we don't have to think to beat it.))
I very much disagree. If a good group with at least decent gear and some skill is needed to beat a major raid or dungeon boss - the only way that wandering trash can be challenging for them is if a partial group (two or three characters for example) or a group with poor gear or a group with inexperienced or simply below average players would find that same wandering trash to be the enemies from hell - totally unbeatable.
Trash or even lesser bosses should be relatively trivial for the hypothetical well balanced and geared group so that groups and players that aren't as well developed can also play the game and gain the experience and gear that one day may advance them to become an A-list group.
If Pantheon was instanced - may all Gods forbid - all enemies could be suitable for any group that encountered them. But in landscape that needs to be playable for everyone - and keep in mind that approximately half the players will have below average skill, not to mention experience and gear - trash mobs need to be ...trash.
I don't really see the problem with that being the case, that a partial group or group with poor gear/lack of experience would find some mobs to be enemies from hell or unbeatable. Those players who find themselves lacking can always go to different areas and/or fight lower con mobs until they sort themselves out. I feel common or "trash" mobs of appropriate level to a group should be a real challenge/threat for a well balanced group.
The notion that anything should be trivial is absurd to me. For the majority of the game players can very well choose their difficulty, if they want trivial means to level then they can farm light blue/blue con mobs to the end of time.
Couldn't of said it better myself.
Riahuf22 said:Iksar said:dorotea said:((I want every encounter to be challenging. From the lowliest wandering monster up to the largest raid boss, nothing should ever be so simple or so easy for it's level that we don't have to think to beat it.))
I very much disagree. If a good group with at least decent gear and some skill is needed to beat a major raid or dungeon boss - the only way that wandering trash can be challenging for them is if a partial group (two or three characters for example) or a group with poor gear or a group with inexperienced or simply below average players would find that same wandering trash to be the enemies from hell - totally unbeatable.
Trash or even lesser bosses should be relatively trivial for the hypothetical well balanced and geared group so that groups and players that aren't as well developed can also play the game and gain the experience and gear that one day may advance them to become an A-list group.
If Pantheon was instanced - may all Gods forbid - all enemies could be suitable for any group that encountered them. But in landscape that needs to be playable for everyone - and keep in mind that approximately half the players will have below average skill, not to mention experience and gear - trash mobs need to be ...trash.
I don't really see the problem with that being the case, that a partial group or group with poor gear/lack of experience would find some mobs to be enemies from hell or unbeatable. Those players who find themselves lacking can always go to different areas and/or fight lower con mobs until they sort themselves out. I feel common or "trash" mobs of appropriate level to a group should be a real challenge/threat for a well balanced group.
The notion that anything should be trivial is absurd to me. For the majority of the game players can very well choose their difficulty, if they want trivial means to level then they can farm light blue/blue con mobs to the end of time.
Couldn't of said it better myself.
farm players not mobs!
#moblivesmatter
Nephele said:I want every encounter to be challenging. From the lowliest wandering monster up to the largest raid boss, nothing should ever be so simple or so easy for it's level that we don't have to think to beat it.
I want to see real differences between players of the same class based on meaningful choices. Gear selection, spell selection, ability use - all options should be viable in different ways, and players should have the flexibility to play uniquely from each other.
I want to see true group dynamics. The whole should be greater than the sum of its parts because of the interaction of everyone's skills and abilities. A group with a shaman healing should work differently than a group with a druid or cleric healing, but still be just as effective. There should never be a single standard for group composition, or required classes, and instead, players should be able to make different combinations work just as effectively, simply by leveraging different sets of synergies within their groups.
Nephele, I have the utmost respect for you, built over years of reading your posts and the discussions between us on a wide variety of topics. But I gotta ask: Have you NOT watched any of the live streams? Because not a single livestream to date has even hinted at any of the things you're wanting to see. At this point in development if none of that has shown up, what is the likelyhood it ever will? Extremely unlikely to definitely not.
I'm not saying the game will be boring, but it's not going to be some evolutionary approach to high fantasy gaming rather an incremental change to many already existing mechanics found in any number of other MMOs.
Vandraad said:Nephele said:I want every encounter to be challenging. From the lowliest wandering monster up to the largest raid boss, nothing should ever be so simple or so easy for it's level that we don't have to think to beat it.
I want to see real differences between players of the same class based on meaningful choices. Gear selection, spell selection, ability use - all options should be viable in different ways, and players should have the flexibility to play uniquely from each other.
I want to see true group dynamics. The whole should be greater than the sum of its parts because of the interaction of everyone's skills and abilities. A group with a shaman healing should work differently than a group with a druid or cleric healing, but still be just as effective. There should never be a single standard for group composition, or required classes, and instead, players should be able to make different combinations work just as effectively, simply by leveraging different sets of synergies within their groups.
Nephele, I have the utmost respect for you, built over years of reading your posts and the discussions between us on a wide variety of topics. But I gotta ask: Have you NOT watched any of the live streams? Because not a single livestream to date has even hinted at any of the things you're wanting to see. At this point in development if none of that has shown up, what is the likelyhood it ever will? Extremely unlikely to definitely not.
I'm not saying the game will be boring, but it's not going to be some evolutionary approach to high fantasy gaming rather an incremental change to many already existing mechanics found in any number of other MMOs.
lol Vandradd, high-five. Some people dont realize this is EQ with better graphics and new features.
Vandraad said:
Nephele, I have the utmost respect for you, built over years of reading your posts and the discussions between us on a wide variety of topics. But I gotta ask: Have you NOT watched any of the live streams? Because not a single livestream to date has even hinted at any of the things you're wanting to see. At this point in development if none of that has shown up, what is the likelyhood it ever will? Extremely unlikely to definitely not.
I'm not saying the game will be boring, but it's not going to be some evolutionary approach to high fantasy gaming rather an incremental change to many already existing mechanics found in any number of other MMOs.
LOL I have indeed watched many of the streams Vandraad ;)
Personally speaking, I always try to temper my own expectations to a degree. I'm well aware that VR probably won't do everything that I hope they will do - I mean, it's their game, not mine, after all. However, I still think it's important to articulate what I hope to see. Both as input and feedback to VR's creative process, as well as for the benefit of our community and for people who are looking at Pantheon and trying to decide whether or not to pledge their support.
I look at it this way. I would like Pantheon to be a game that helps mark the beginning of a renaissance in MMORPGs, one that validates all the things that many of us have been saying for years regarding challenge, depth, and socialization. If I simply accept the things that I see in early development without providing feedback and yes, pushing a little bit for areas where I think they can be better, then that would make me a bit of a hypocrite, wouldn't it?
I don't think any of the goals I outlined are unachievable or would even require very substantial changes to what we've seen in streams so far. The fundamentals are in place, and the systems that we've seen could support all of them. I think what they would require though is for someone to be thinking about those things specifically as the game gets fleshed out - which is why I started this thread. Again, I know it won't be perfect. But it doesn't have to be, as long as it ends up "better" than its predecessors.
Aich said:
Some people dont realize this is EQ with better graphics and new features.
Not to start an additional debate, or belittle your opinion in any way - but I can say quite honestly that if Pantheon turns out this way, I believe that it will fail, or at least never reach its full potential. At least for my part, I'm pretty sure that VR isn't out to clone EQ's gameplay - be a spiritual successor and reference concepts, yes, but building a unique Pantheon experience that is fun and engaging on top of that.
Aich said:Vandraad said:Nephele said:I want every encounter to be challenging. From the lowliest wandering monster up to the largest raid boss, nothing should ever be so simple or so easy for it's level that we don't have to think to beat it.
I want to see real differences between players of the same class based on meaningful choices. Gear selection, spell selection, ability use - all options should be viable in different ways, and players should have the flexibility to play uniquely from each other.
I want to see true group dynamics. The whole should be greater than the sum of its parts because of the interaction of everyone's skills and abilities. A group with a shaman healing should work differently than a group with a druid or cleric healing, but still be just as effective. There should never be a single standard for group composition, or required classes, and instead, players should be able to make different combinations work just as effectively, simply by leveraging different sets of synergies within their groups.
Nephele, I have the utmost respect for you, built over years of reading your posts and the discussions between us on a wide variety of topics. But I gotta ask: Have you NOT watched any of the live streams? Because not a single livestream to date has even hinted at any of the things you're wanting to see. At this point in development if none of that has shown up, what is the likelyhood it ever will? Extremely unlikely to definitely not.
I'm not saying the game will be boring, but it's not going to be some evolutionary approach to high fantasy gaming rather an incremental change to many already existing mechanics found in any number of other MMOs.
lol Vandradd, high-five. Some people dont realize this is EQ with better graphics and new features.
I also realize the devs said the mechanics haven't even been brought into the game because they are busy doing everything else, and to say this is basically a everquest reskin is insulting, no one wants that, we want an old school game sure, but not a everquest reskin.