Currently, we do not know what classes or class types people will want in a party. Since the revamp we have only seen 4 classes in action (Dire Lord, Shaman, Wizard, and Rogue). I vote for waiting till the other classes are released so we can see how they perform in a group environment before we start shouting that the sky is falling.
As to why you would want an Enchanter in the party over a Rogue... Buffs, debuffs, charm, crowd control, and damage would be my guess. Remember that when a Rogue goes the CC route they are not able to deal damage. What will the Enchanter be able to accomplish while performing crowd control? No clue at the moment, but like many, I am looking forward to finding out.
Raidil said: But from what I've seen from last streams this last class grouping we no longer need.
That stream should not be your only data point as to whether or not Crowd Control will be desirable post-launch. We intentionally tried to push Rogue CC capabilities to the limit, and we discovered that it was too easy for the Rogue to lock down multiple NPCs simultaneously. The rogue will be nerfed to some degree. But that's what testing is for. This sort of thing happens constantly in game development - you just don't normally see it broadcasted on the internet. And that really goes for all classes - stats are going to be tweaked all throughout Alpha and Beta. It's far too early to say a class will or will not be popular after launch.
To clarify some things:
Supporting ability goes far beyond just providing CC. You wanted to know why someone would want to bring an enchanter well there are several reasons. The first is their ability to provide mana regen to the party while in combat. The second reason is that even if other classes have CC options available to them, the enchanter is probably going to best at doing it efficiently in their natural combat loop. The next reason is their ability to provide utility in the form of group illusions which would allow groups to bypass certain areas easier. The final reason is their potential for debuffing.
You referenced EQ briefly but the thing with EQ is that there wasn't just one class responsible CC. Yes enchanters were designed for that niche specifically but many other classes had access to CC in the form of a root, and off the top of my head clerics also had the ability to lull enemies acting as a form of crowd control. My point is classes are multi-dimensional and they should be thought of as such. Just because a monk can off tank doesn't mean a second tank is always going to be overlooked, and just because the rogue is able to CC doesn't mean that the enchanter has no use.
We are in a state where all classes are not implemented yet and trying to compare a class to one that hasn't been shown off yet is unreasonable. Now if you wanted to evaluate the rogues DPS output and compare it to the wizards you could probably make this comparison. If you were to come to the conclusion that the rogue was doing too much damage in comparison to the wizard especially since he was CCing most of the time, then a reasonable argument could be made. However, again we are in Pre-alpha and there will be a lot of tuning before the game is launched.
The game's classes and numbers aren't set in stone yet, so many changes will happen.
And yes, to a certain extent, group won't necessarily absolutely NEED any class per say. It really depends on the balance the dev want to approach.
Of course the optimal group will have A tank, A healer, 2 DPS and 2 other classes, but maybe you'll be able to have a decently successful group with no tank but a Ranger to hold aggro, 3 healers one other DPS and one Control.
While leveling in DAoC the best way to level up was to get one or multiple mage with pointblank AOE damage with one or 2 shield tank protecting him/them with 2 healers.
But you could be doing good with just 1 Healer 1 Crowd controller and 6 tanks (pretty much every Tank could be melee DPS in DAoC, ... not as good a the dedicaded melee DPS, but close enough).
I mean, the fun is also to run groups with the classes available without always being 100% optimized and make it work.
Even sometimes a duo of classes could potentially XP faster than a full group. I leveled up a Berseker in DAoC in duo with a buff spec healer and we were leveling up at a similar pace (if nor faster) than the "Optimized" 8 man full groups.
That is for leveling and I expect leveling to be a good portion of the game.
If you talk about Raid, you'll very likely NEED one Tank and one Healer then the other 4 might not always be set in stone, and that's part of the fun I think.
Offical Pantheon Wiki:5.2 Will Pantheon's classes have clear-cut roles such as the holy trinity (tank, healer, DPS) or will they be much more flexible/customizable?
Pantheon does indeed use a class based system and those classes do fulfill roles, especially in group and raid contexts. There will also be opportunities to focus each class on more specific and specialized roles, especially at higher levels. That said, because we feel it’s important that classes fulfill distinct roles, creating interdependence is vital to a fulfilling social and cooperative experience. If everyone is the same, this simply cannot be achieved. Likewise, if every class is absolutely unique, grouping can become overly complicated and, in some cases, certain classes could be less desirable to have in a group than others. To avoid this, Pantheon will use a quaternity system consisting of tank, healer, DPS, and crowd-control.
It says specifically "crowd-control" not support
If it wasent for there statement "if every class is absolutely unique, grouping can become overly complicated and, in some cases, certain classes could be less desirable to have in a group than others." I too would be concerned that they are way to far away from "specific and specialized roles" But it's not even Alpha yet. By the FAQ you can see the goals. I think in this last Video(s) they simply showed how far they CAN take it (to 100% CC), not that they will, and it's FAR from where they will end up (I hope)
Also keep in mind that an enchanter support would have also kept downtime to a minimum with the mana regen in addition to adding some dps while also doing crowd control. It is great that there is not going to be a group meta in terms of what classes you should want. An enchanter/bard should not be an absolute requirement for grouping dungeon content.
The fact that a support role could do everything the rogue did in the last stream while also still doing damage, buffing the group, debuffing etc just goes to show that even at its best the rogue makes a poor filler in place of a class that actually specializes in the support role.
"CC" isn't part of the Quaternity as it was a somewhat poor/limited label, it is now Support which does seem to heavily include crowd control but only as a part of a larger whole. I'd consider the FAQ (last revised in 2017) a poor source compared to the more recently updated class pages which list the role of Enchanter as "Support."
vjek said:Bazgrim said:... It's far too early to say a class will or will not be popular after launch.
Oh? Wouldn't it be more true than false to say that any class that can perform more than one role would be more popular than one that can't?
I don't necessarily believe that to be true. If they made one of the healers or dps classes add little to no utility but they could heal 15-20% more than other healers or do 15-20% more damage than other damage dealers I feel the class would be as popular or moreso than a hybrid who offers aspects of utility but is perhaps weaker at their main role.
torveld said:vjek said:Bazgrim said:... It's far too early to say a class will or will not be popular after launch.
Oh? Wouldn't it be more true than false to say that any class that can perform more than one role would be more popular than one that can't?
I don't necessarily believe that to be true. If they made one of the healers or dps classes add little to no utility but they could heal 15-20% more than other healers or do 15-20% more damage than other damage dealers I feel the class would be as popular or moreso than a hybrid who offers aspects of utility but is perhaps weaker at their main role.
I think what vjek was stating was a class "within a role" would be more appealing compared to the others within that same role if it could perform more than just that role. To use your example of the healers... if the cleric could effectively tank at the cost of healing "sometimes", that would make them much more appealing than the other two healers that couldn't tank "ever". Likewise, if the Paladin could CC or Heal at the loss of tanking "temporarily", they would be much more appealing to players.
Let's not forget that all classes can deal damage, so DPS wouldn't make any class "more appealing" within a role because there isn't going to be any DPS meter.
Khraag said:The game's classes and numbers aren't set in stone yet, so many changes will happen.
...the optimal group will have A tank, A healer, 2 DPS and 2 other classes...
I think the point, or at least how I read it, is that classes like the bard and enchanter aren't required or even wanted if other classes can do what they do and also do tons of damage as "real" DPS classes. Why waste a slot on a few buffs and CC when you can get buffs and CC that are close enough from DPS classes? There's not much point in being a master of CC if a rogue will suffice most of the time, or a master of certain buffs if you can get "good enough" from another class that can also out-DPS you.
I know things are still very (very, very) early but if the rogue keeps even half of its CC ability there will be no point at all in bringing an enchanter. A skilled rogue will be able to maximize their CC ability without sacrificing much at all in terms of DPS. I worry that abilities will be so spread around that we actually end up with WoW's "all classes are the same" approach that is so off-putting to real MMO gamers.
My history is littered with bad class choices when I first log in to a new game. I played rogue in EQ1 when nobody else did and suffered quite a bit for that choice. I later rolled an enchanter and suddenly had the time of my life. In other games I always manage to pick the class that is least effective because it sounds like the most fun. When I finally wised up and started rolling tanks, healers and the occasional pure DPS everything got a lot more fun since I was playing a class that was actually in demand. For years I've waited for a game to reintroduce the EQ enchanter because it's still the best class I've ever played. But if Pantheon's enchanter isn't at least as good I'll avoid it like the plague and play another tank or healer instead. Those hybrid or specialized "support" classes just aren't worth the effort.
Darch said:Let's not forget that all classes can deal damage, so DPS wouldn't make any class "more appealing" within a role because there isn't going to be any DPS meter.
If there are numbers for damage dealt there will be meters and there's nothing VR can do to change that.
vjek said:Bazgrim said:... It's far too early to say a class will or will not be popular after launch.
Oh? Wouldn't it be more true than false to say that any class that can perform more than one role would be more popular than one that can't?
Sure, except that at the current time, no one can predict with absolute certainty which classes (if any) will be able to effectively perform more than one role at launch.
Akilae said:I think the point, or at least how I read it, is that classes like the bard and enchanter aren't required or even wanted if other classes can do what they do and also do tons of damage as "real" DPS classes. Why waste a slot on a few buffs and CC when you can get buffs and CC that are close enough from DPS classes? There's not much point in being a master of CC if a rogue will suffice most of the time, or a master of certain buffs if you can get "good enough" from another class that can also out-DPS you.
I know things are still very (very, very) early but if the rogue keeps even half of its CC ability there will be no point at all in bringing an enchanter. A skilled rogue will be able to maximize their CC ability without sacrificing much at all in terms of DPS. I worry that abilities will be so spread around that we actually end up with WoW's "all classes are the same" approach that is so off-putting to real MMO gamers.
My history is littered with bad class choices when I first log in to a new game. I played rogue in EQ1 when nobody else did and suffered quite a bit for that choice. I later rolled an enchanter and suddenly had the time of my life. In other games I always manage to pick the class that is least effective because it sounds like the most fun. When I finally wised up and started rolling tanks, healers and the occasional pure DPS everything got a lot more fun since I was playing a class that was actually in demand. For years I've waited for a game to reintroduce the EQ enchanter because it's still the best class I've ever played. But if Pantheon's enchanter isn't at least as good I'll avoid it like the plague and play another tank or healer instead. Those hybrid or specialized "support" classes just aren't worth the effort.
Yeah I partially agree in the sense that everyone thinks they'll always be able to group the class they want at the time they want, but from my experience, that's not the case. More often than not you'll get a tank a healer and then the rest you'll pick whatever as long as it's not gimping your group.
There will be an optimal meta with X or Y class considered better than others. I'm not saying a class should do everything but if all classes are able to be versatile and somewhat fulfill a secondary role when droping their main role drastically, then why not? That would prevent spending too much time finding the perfect class all the time and that's nice.
The rogue example, I am fairly sure it will be changed so I wouldn't worry about that, honestly the balance of the game will be WIP until the release and even continue forever.
Akilae said:Darch said:Let's not forget that all classes can deal damage, so DPS wouldn't make any class "more appealing" within a role because there isn't going to be any DPS meter.
If there are numbers for damage dealt there will be meters and there's nothing VR can do to change that.
3rd party meters won't be in at launch during a time when role choices (and a class' ability to perform multiple roles) matter. Everyone will be able to perform SOME damage, and even still, a DPS meter will not be someone's determining factor for making a "non-DPS" alt with the goal of performing DPS, because they will never out-perform a class designed for DPS. If DPS is someone's goal, they will select a DPS class (or be greatly disappointed if watching DPS meters)... and likely the rogue if they want a melee DPS if the other 2 melee DPS can't perform other roles (tank/heal/support) as effectively.... Because being able to perform "multiple roles" in a game focused on classes having a "single role" is "more appealing" to some.
But to Bazgrim's point, not all skills have been flushed out and I'm sure the Enc, Bard, and Necro will be much better at/have an easier time with support (CC) than the rogue.
Raidil said: ... Currently with some of the classes doing as well as they can there's no need for a crowd control or purely support class. ...
IMO:
Correct, that's the whole point. Unless they remove ALL crowd control from the Rogue, they're a less squishy version of an Enchanter, for the purposes of Crowd Control, as demonstrated.
Do you want a very squishy Enchanter with all that risk? Or a Class that can perform the role of an Enchanter, for the purposes of Crowd Control, and one that can leave & enter combat at any time, and wear better armor than an Enchanter?
Over the past 7 years, every released piece of public information regarding Pantheon classes shows that some classes are multi-role, or MORE multi-role than others.
The past and present kit or skill set of the Rogue make it extraordinarily attractive as a multi-role class in a game where the majority of the content is grouping-required with crowd control required.
Unless they completely remove or make it's role singular (to simply DPS) or make all of it's non-DPS abilities and skills ~useless, it's the default choice.
There has to be counters or limits placed on these amazingly powerful multi-roles and multi-role abilties, or.. every other class will need to be given similarly amazing powerful roles/abilities, which simply amplifies the problem from a long term design perspective. I'm honestly surprised they have left the Rogue and demonstrated it like it is. And I played a Rogue for years in EQ1, and a Brigand for years in EQ2, and a Rogue in DDO, so it's not like I have no idea on the Role the class can or has played in these types of games. I know, based on history, that class envy will drive every vestige of fun out of the class if it remains as-is.
There's no doubt if Charm is actually permanent and/or is somewhere in the 50-90% of original mob strength, Enchanter will have a role as an incredibly powerful pet class, sure. But.. it means perma charm and 50-90% of original mob strength to make it attractive enough. Again, that's just.. overpowered doesn't even come close to describing it. :) Which again, is fine, until everyone plays an Enchanter because they can bring 2-3 players worth of DPS to a group. The pendulum of power is swinging pretty wildly, and it will have to be a continuous stream of nerfs between now and post-launch to even get close to a sliver of balance and fun across all the multi-role classes, based on their current class pages and current videos demonstrating the classes so far. It just makes me .. regret the last 7 years of VR not iterating on class balance design with the community.
I mean, it's been said on other social/media platforms for Pantheon, but compare the Wizard and Rogue in PA5/Q1 2021?
Who the hell would bring a Wizard? Balancing class/role/multi-role combat based on out of combat utility is just repeating the mistakes of the past.
I've played a Wizard on EQ1 TLP through to PoP, and there's no way in hell I would play a Pantheon Wizard, as is, compared to the Rogue.
Even WITH the potential ability to fast travel, which has yet to be demonstrated, the combat efficacy and multi-role attractiveness is just astonishing in power, comparatively.
Isnt the whole point so that you dont always need to build a perfectly balanced group every night you play?
I'd rather just grab whatever pops up lfg first then spend an extra hour waiting for the missing role in our group to show up.
If we burn with dps fast enouh CC isnt going to be missed that much, or an off tank can split the pull and the group can manage.
vjek said:Correct, Darch. Logically, any class that can multi-class or multi-role, no matter how little, all other things being equal, will typically or generally be more attractive than one that can't, in a game where Role is ~everything. (hence the caveat of more true than false)
Semantics and theoreticals aside, I can't recall a single game where a hybrid class hasn't been less effective in each of its multiple roles than the specialist classes are. Even IRL there's the well known saying "Jack of all trades and master of none" impying anything that doesn't specialise is inferior to something that does.
It's pretty obvious that, yes, that something that can do two things "all other things being equal" is better than something that can do one... I would be concerned, except for the knowledge that in almost every case - in MMORPGs especially - it isn't true and there's no indication that VR would overlook something so obvious or intend something different.
Ironically, a concern that you often voice is that VR don't do things differently enough.
And the answer to the OP is: It's pre-alpha. Yes, classes could be better balanced than we saw in that stream. Good thing there are many test phases still to go, eh?
I thought the playthrough showed a great proof of concept. You had a party of players come together and adjust to each others chosen playstyle to form a mostly successful group that could progress through content.
I don't think the rogue undermined the desirability of any other class with its attempt at filling the role of pinch mezzer for the group.
Firstly, Minus is a good player and has been working to master this style of rogue gameplay since the last sneak peak in October. The high skill ceiling of this tactic should be factored in when measuring balance.
Secondly, the tactic was risky. Pulls were erratic. Hate transers were dangerous. Kill speed was unregulated making it hard for the team to find pacing. Most of the deaths in the night stemmed from issues caused by the rogue attempting to main control. Risk should be a factor when measuring desirability.
Thirdly, the party would have been healthier if the rogue wasn't attempting to control. Ultimately, the party would of been better off foregoing a control in favor of a soft CC and burn kind of strategy. The party had many interrupts and binds. Minus would of had much cleaner pulls acting as the parties fisher directly instead of trying to comms relay the timing to a tank body pulling. The more regulated pulls would have allowed the wizard to gauge when to nova and when to recover. This alternate strategy would have also given more value to the parties 2 healer composition. Alternatively, switching the rogue out for an enchanter would have been better as well. The enchanter brings powerful mana sustain and cast speed buffs allowing the wizard to bring the dmg of two dps. the enchanter also brings Powerful monster control with cleaner pulling and hate transfers.
There will be many wonderful strategies and interconnected elements of party design. I for one am happy to see that people can come together playing how they want to and still form a unique and successful party. And even though it won't always be the most effective party, it will still feel strong to the group experiencing it.
-Gottbeard-
@Raidil Honestly, I think you are drawing conclusion too fast.
The balance of the classes will evolve and to be fair, in Alpha, you don't have all the classes, so you can't even work on balance all that much. Don't read too much into balance as for the stream that was showed.
Don't think the state of the game and the classes showed, are set in stone. Tweaks and modifications will occur during development, that's why they have Alpha, beta etc.
I'll tell you what. I actually like that there is blatant imbalance because it shows they are trying things out and everyone reacts so they'll clearly change it. it's better than just copying what was done before without changing the mold.