Interesting Article

[Tazzrin Jaegernaut]

I found this article today at Gamergod. It touches on the pros and cons of the archetype decision Sigil has made.

You can find it here:

http://www.gamergod.com/article.php?...fansite_id=118

What do you guys think?

[Lightning]

If they can do a better job of this than EQ2 did (all archetypes the same, equally boring) then I will be impressed. If you look at it EQ1 had archetypes, they were just less clearly defined than in 2nd generation MMOs.

Only time, balance and beta will tell

[Tazzrin Jaegernaut]

The loss of the "holy trinity" is the best thing. The solid classes were set in stone for groups, whereas the less defined hybrids were less attractive when another class could do what the hybrids could, but only better. EQ2 just threw out a hodge-podge of classes, which sounded cool at first, but ended up being the exact same classes just good and evil opposites. I agree, very boring.

[Lightning]

As long as the classes are as unique and well defined as Luclin / post-Luclin era EQ1 I will be very happy. I think the term "archetype" has gotten a bad press from EQ2 yet we forget EQ1 had them but had no term for them:

Heavy Fighter
Warrior
Paladin
Shadowknight

Light Fighter
Bard
Beastlord
Beserker
Monk
Ranger
Rogue

Arcade Damage Dealer
Mage
Necromancer
Wizard

Healer
Cleric
Druid
Shaman

Yet look at the variety we got across those classes! Some even crossed into other classes's archetypes, and the game was stronger for it.

Here's hoping Vanguard recaptures that degree of uniqueness amongst classes within the archetype system.

[Metatron]

EQ's archetypal set up was actually much different. you have to classify them based on usage and ability, not on class name.

Tank
Warrior
Shadowknight*
Paladin*

Slower
Shaman
Enchanter**

Healer
Cleric

DPS, Useless, or Niche Utility
Bard
Beastlord
Berserker
Monk
Ranger
Rogue
Magician
Necromancer
Wizard
Druid


*Only used as tanks in groups or special case raids
**Only the main slower in groups

EDIT: Let me flesh out my point.

The Ideal group in EQ in almost all situations would be:

Warrior
Cleric
Shaman
Bard
Rogue
Rogue

The point of an archetype system is to avoid this. In my opinion, making all classes completely balanced ruins a game, a la EQ2, and Mr. McQuad knows that. What I think will end up happening is that different areas and mobs will be best destroyed by certain group setups. So after one assembles a pick up group, one assesses the orientation of the group, and heads to an area favorable for them.

[Tazzrin Jaegernaut]

I like how the devs have completely hurdled the obstacle that was class balancing. Instead of wasting valuable time trying to rework the classes so they are balanced, they reworked the environment so that certain classes will be more attractive given the environment that they are hunting in. Its genious.

[Lightning]

Mmmm, I was thinking in the case of grouping and not raiding, fitting the EQ classes into the Vanguard archetype system by means of comparison, perhaps I should have made that clearer. I am well aware that many classes bridge several archetypes, but that is what brings class distinction.

One of the best healers I ever fought with was a Druid. Her skill exceeded the vast majority of Clerics I have ever met and really opened my eyes to what a Druid can do. Shaman may be slowers, but slowing is a form of healing (less damage dealt, less to heal) - I missed Enchanters off my list, oops!

I consider raids to be a special case and therefore balanced differently. Just because EQ1 raids required a warrior and a CH rotation doesn't change the fact that Paladins and Shadowknights could tank group content as well as a Warrior with the benefit of agro lock. The fix here is to make raids either require specific tanks (as is being done, says Brad) or give non Warrior tanks a way to tank a raid that does not make them identical to Warriors.

Your use of the words "DPS, Useless, or Niche Utility" is interesting. Who in that list is useless or niche? Also, your ideal group is all well and good if you have a group of people who play together all the time, but in pick up groups I often took who I could get, so for me a group was:

Tank (Warrior, Me)
Healer
Slower (if we could find one)
DPS
DPS
DPS

It's no coincidence in Vanguard that there are twice as many DPS classes as there are healers or tanks, subdivided into melee and caster. My point is that the archetypes in EQ are loose, as you've also pointed out, which (raids notwithstanding) produces a lot more options if you are willing to try them. Post Luclin EQ there was a lot of content my girlfriend and I could do with just a Warrior and a Beastlord if you looked off the beaten track.

Where Vanguard has to be careful is that by bluring the lines between subclasses within an archetype you make them all the same with differently named abilities:

Warrior: Kick
Paladin: Holy Kick
Shadowknight: Evil Kick of the Damned

Only time will tell if they can avoid this homogeny.

Originally Posted by Tazzrin

I like how the devs have completely hurdled the obstacle that was class balancing. Instead of wasting valuable time trying to rework the classes so they are balanced, they reworked the environment so that certain classes will be more attractive given the environment that they are hunting in. Its genious.

This is indeed genius, I hope they can pull it off.

[Tazzrin Jaegernaut]

You forgot:

Inquisitor: Kick of Inquisition

[Lightning]

Inquisitor: Unexpected Kick

Nobody expects the Kicking Inquisition!

<cough>

[Tazzrin Jaegernaut]

Blarg Blarg Blarg! Death!