Next expansion.

[Ovi]

Only if you restrict yourself to 1/3rd the game and/or only play against 1/3rd the opposing realms...

You don't have to roll every class and cast every spell to get most out the game, at worst by only sticking to one realm you still get to play against the opposing realms classes/abilities and only lose out on the PvE which is mostly fairly similar. That has a lot more longevity in it than just coming up against the same abilities that you've got on your char all the time. Would much rather play a game that's got too much to do than too little, variation means there's always something more you can do if you want to.

Surely you are also missing out on coming up against the abilities you have if you want complete variety?

Variation between sides isn't the only way to give something more to do, adding extra content ... for everyone ... is also a way to give something else to do. I mean they could add 1 different class to 3 realms, or 3 different classes to every realm, which gives the most variety?

As you already said PvE is mostly similar, so why should I have to go through a levelling treadmill 3 times to enjoy everything? Isn't once enough? Or at least let me have the advanategs that come with having a charcater in the realm that has done it once.

In an ideal world I would agree, but there are too many issues caused for very little gain in having the realms completely different. Lets face it, most DAoC whines are about realm balance than anything else.

[Xest]

Surely you are also missing out on coming up against the abilities you have if you want complete variety?

No, the point is that you don't have to use an ability to experience it you could be effected by it or a realm mate could use it instead. It doesn't detract from the game if say an Eldritch in your group gets to cast disease and you don't tbh. Lots of characters can cast spells, the spell effects can be seen whether you cast it, a realm mate casts it or an enemy casts it, likewise the sounds can be heard and the effects can be noted.

I mean they could add 1 different class to 3 realms, or 3 different classes to every realm, which gives the most variety?

Er, 3 classes to every realm? Even if you only play one realm's class you still get to see the other realms class out there and play against it. You still have every option to play that realm yourself also if you want to actually play the class.

As you already said PvE is mostly similar, so why should I have to go through a levelling treadmill 3 times to enjoy everything? Isn't once enough? Or at least let me have the advanategs that come with having a charcater in the realm that has done it once.

But it's not really that big an advantage to matter, the realms are different enough for you to find it non-tedious levelling up in a new realm but similar enough that your experiences can be carried across and that if you don't want to you're not missing too much. I've rolled multiple 50s in all 3 realms on 5 different servers (Hib/Pryd, Hib/MLF, Mid/Galahad, Mid/Lamorak, Alb/Merlin) without any problems.

In an ideal world I would agree, but there are too many issues caused for very little gain in having the realms completely different. Lets face it, most DAoC whines are about realm balance than anything else.

I used to agree but with WoW and Planetside still having pretty blatant balance issues and even UO where there were no realms, everyone could be everything yet some things were still fotm overpowered combos I don't think it's a realistic argument. You could argue that even in Quake there was balance issues with the rocket launcher trumping everything else. Also, the most glaring balance issues in DAoC could easily be fixed by Mythic but they clearly have have some ulterior motive in keeping some classes overpowered. Why else would Bainshees/Warlocks etc. be allowed to be so obviously and undeniably overpowered for so long without getting fixed - a fix that could be done in a neglible amount of time if need be. It's not uniqueness between realms that causes balance issues in DAoC but Mythics clear intentions to allow some classes to remain overpowered for whatever reason.

You could theoretically if designing a new game ensure balance by say, giving classes a maximum set of points where a point refers to a fixed predefined set of damage, defensive ability or utility hence ensuring classes are fairly even without being gimp/overpowered. Of course things like utility are subjective in deciding how overpowered things are and people find new ways to use tools but all in all, a well thought out system would allow uniqueness between realms without causing a real noticeable imbalance. Alternatively you could do it on a group basis rather than a per-class basis to ensure every group type has an equal amount of DPS/utility/defensive abilities. There are things that'd need ironing out of course but you get the idea anyhow

[Ovi]

But it's not really that big an advantage to matter, the realms are different enough for you to find it non-tedious levelling up in a new realm but similar enough that your experiences can be carried across and that if you don't want to you're not missing too much. I've rolled multiple 50s in all 3 realms on 5 different servers (Hib/Pryd, Hib/MLF, Mid/Galahad, Mid/Lamorak, Alb/Merlin) without any problems.

I think you misunderstood most of what I was saying.

The only point you made that seemed relevant is the one above, and I would disgree on that. I rolled multiple characters on multiple realms, the only ones I ever managed to get passed 25 (that includes /level!) were on Hib/pryd. Anywhere else I found incredibly tedious, either in hib on other servers, or in either of the other 2 realms.

I know we won't agree, we actually look for very different things in games anyway, so I won't bother replying any longer, especially as my DAoC time is long over

[<ankh>]

I don't like the sound of the new expansion, but I havent played Darkness Rising so if Im bored I will start with a new copy once this one is released (after checking feedback ofc)

/Ankh

[Lairiodd]

[quote="Xest"]
You could theoretically if designing a new game ensure balance by say, giving classes a maximum set of points where a point refers to a fixed predefined set of damage, defensive ability or utility hence ensuring classes are fairly even without being gimp/overpowered. Of course things like utility are subjective in deciding how overpowered things are and people find new ways to use tools but all in all, a well thought out system would allow uniqueness between realms without causing a real noticeable imbalance. Alternatively you could do it on a group basis rather than a per-class basis to ensure every group type has an equal amount of DPS/utility/defensive abilities. There are things that'd need ironing out of course but you get the idea anyhow ]

I think you need to balance both group and solo. The problem is that when playing a group, people will often have a role. If you are the main dps for a group, then a boost to your dps will boost the group's dps. However, a boost to something else that you rarely use will have almost no effect.

This pigeon holing of classes makes it harder to balance as you can't correct it by giving secondary skills.

There are many types of balancing that can occur.

Intra class skill balancing

This is probably the least important. This means that all the skills that a class has are equally useful. If you get this right, then there will be many templates for this class that are popular. If you get it wrong then people who play that class will tend to spec in the same way.

Intra Realm class balancing

This is where classes from the same realm compete with each other. If you get it right, then group makeups would be reasonably varied. This has been done pretty badly on the healer side. One slot in every group is allocated to druids and one to bards for example. Also, certain classes have a hard time getting into groups at all.

The second aspect is situational balancing. Certain classes will be better at certain situations.

Inter Realm balancing

This is where 2 groups from any 2 realms that are reasonably setup should be equally powerful. If you get it right, then when controlling for things like population, all realms should perform equally. This is also the one that seems to be concentrated on as the major balance issue. Also, it is the only balance issue which has to be balanced or it will lead to population

------------------------------------------

I wonder if reasonable balance could be obtained by having all classes with the same function equal with respect to their main function, but allowing differences wrt secondary functions. Also, they need not implement their main function equally.

For example, all dps tanks would have the same damage output. However, the styles for each class could be different as long as they resulted in the same damage. The tanks would also probably have the same AF etc. However, for any secondary skills they could be completely different. Likewise with a nuker. Their main output would be equally balanced but they would have different utility.

On the group balance thing, I think it would be worth spreading abilties around more. This doesn't mean that one class wouldn't get more powerful versions.

For example, you could have it so warden and enchanter speeds stacked to give speed 5. Thus you could have a bard in the group or a warden + enchanter. Likewise, you could give half of the spec buffs each to the other 2 healing classes. This would mean that you can get a the same spec buffs from an extra warden + bard as you could from getting a driud. The would mean that you can get speed 5 for a single group spot if you get a bard, but for 2 slots otherwise.

However, as a game matures, the playerbase has a tendency to switch from generalists to specialists. A tank/healer hybrid does well at the start as there are no opted groups. However, as time passes group leaders start insisting on either a pure tank or a pure healer as the group slots get more set in stone.

[Gandelf]

I sometimes feel that Mythic bring out expansions just for the sake of it. Too many of them imo. Instead of bringing out what I would class as "minor" half-hearted expansions every 5 minutes, they ought to concentrate on redesigning the game.

The best expansion imo so far, was SI. ToA had potential, but they didn't quite get it right. Catacombs was reasonable, but there's not a lot to keep you interested. DR was a joke, except for the main quest... the CLs are not really worth having.

It's a bit like a cyclist who gets a puncture. He sticks a new patch over the puncture, then carries on cycling, then gets another puncture, on which he sticks another patch. Eventually, the inner tube will have so many patches glued onto it that it becomes useless. When that happens, the only solution is to throw it away and buy a new inner tube.

That's what Mythic should do. Instead of all the crappy expansions, they should start afresh and redesign the game and make it truly great once more.

EDIT: In my opinion, DR was not good enough for us to have to pay for it. It should have been a free expansion.

[<ankh>]

I sometimes feel that Mythic bring out expansions just for the sake of it. Too many of them imo. Instead of bringing out what I would class as "minor" half-hearted expansions every 5 minutes, they ought to concentrate on redesigning the game.

If you think thats many expansions (which it isnt - remember, the game isnt exactly new) - check out how many expansions Everquest got

Edit: problem with redesigning is that it might ruin it for people who have been playing for years. If you change too much it turns into something completely different.

/Ankh

[Gandelf]

Edit: problem with redesigning is that it might ruin it for people who have been playing for years. If you change too much it turns into something completely different.

/Ankh

But the other side of the coin... If they redesigned the game, updating all the graphics, improving the gameplay and classes, but in keeping with the Classic version, how many lost players would come back and play it again?

In other words, have we lost more players because the game isn't what it used to be as a result of all the expansions.

It's interesting to note that Blizzard aren't chucking out expansions every 5 minutes for WoW, yet they are seeing no decline in player numbers. I know there is a WoW expansion on the cards soon, but my guess is that one of the reasons why it's so popular is because the game hasn't been messed around with... certainly not as much as DAoC has been interfered with!

[Genedril]

But the other side of the coin... If they redesigned the game, updating all the graphics, improving the gameplay and classes, but in keeping with the Classic version, how many lost players would come back and play it again?

In other words, have we lost more players because the game isn't what it used to be as a result of all the expansions.

It's interesting to note that Blizzard aren't chucking out expansions every 5 minutes for WoW, yet they are seeing no decline in player numbers. I know there is a WoW expansion on the cards soon, but my guess is that one of the reasons why it's so popular is because the game hasn't been messed around with... certainly not as much as DAoC has been interfered with!

Think if they went backwards you'd see a lot of complaints. If you want to be in keeping with classic you've just lost 10% spell pierce, 10% cast speed for starters. If you're really going classic (as in old DAoC not 'classic servers) you've just lost your increased Dex too.

DAoC's always had one pay expansion per year. Some have been better, some worse. DR was one of the better expansions as it gave new PvE, gave abilites that didn't make your toon over powered & gave a variety of ways to gain the new levels (don't want to RvR it, quest it, hate quests then just PvE).

WoW hasn't been out that long (year & a half??) , soon enough they'll start making bolt-ons for that too. Was a while from release to SI iirc. They need to make cash & also keep the player-base interested & if you don't release expansions you're not doing either.

[Lieva]

catacombs was the best content wise
toa was the best zonewise
imo