Discussion:
Will your quest ever end???
(too old to reply)
Gene Stonerly
2008-02-04 12:38:16 UTC
Permalink
Or will you be searching forever in Everquest???

Everquest sounds like an unplayable game!!!
Lunaren
2008-02-04 13:44:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gene Stonerly
Or will you be searching forever in Everquest???
Everquest sounds like an unplayable game!!!
Well, I hope so but I do need to take some time out for a spot in a
television special where we will be exploring my meaningless existence
questing forever in my mom's basement and such.

Otherwise yes, forever hopefully which makes it quite playable and this
question nearly as silly as the invitation to be scrutinized as a percieved
antisocial misfit in need of therapy.

Next...
Palindrome
2008-02-05 12:22:24 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 04:38:16 -0800 (PST), Gene Stonerly
Post by Gene Stonerly
Or will you be searching forever in Everquest???
Everquest sounds like an unplayable game!!!
You sound like a fuckwit :)

2/10 for trolling. Can do better.


Palindrome
Richard Carpenter
2008-02-05 12:55:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Palindrome
On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 04:38:16 -0800 (PST), Gene Stonerly
Post by Gene Stonerly
Or will you be searching forever in Everquest???
Everquest sounds like an unplayable game!!!
You sound like a fuckwit  :)
2/10 for trolling.  Can do better.
I bit generous, don't you think?

--
Richard Carpenter
Lunaren
2008-02-05 18:15:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Palindrome
On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 04:38:16 -0800 (PST), Gene Stonerly
Post by Gene Stonerly
Or will you be searching forever in Everquest???
Everquest sounds like an unplayable game!!!
You sound like a fuckwit :)
2/10 for trolling. Can do better.
I bit generous, don't you think?

--
Richard Carpenter

Tough crowd. You guys don't fool around. Then again years of this kind of BS
and no wonder...
Richard Carpenter
2008-02-06 16:42:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Carpenter
Post by Palindrome
On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 04:38:16 -0800 (PST), Gene Stonerly
Post by Gene Stonerly
Or will you be searching forever in Everquest???
Everquest sounds like an unplayable game!!!
You sound like a fuckwit :)
2/10 for trolling. Can do better.
I bit generous, don't you think?
Tough crowd. You guys don't fool around. Then again years of this kind of BS
and no wonder...
Perhaps if you had better conveyed the intent of your post, people
wouldn't be left to guess at its most likely context when responding
in kind.

If it looks like a troll and smells like a troll...

--
Rich Carpenter
the wharf rat
2008-02-06 18:20:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Carpenter
If it looks like a troll and smells like a troll...
Well, it could be "illusion of troll"...

Actually, that's what they should have done with the
"chimera" mobs. Had them take on the illusion of any other npc
in the zone, only when you con them it says "a disguised chimera
eyes you with complete disdain: don't even bother"...
Palindrome
2008-02-06 18:28:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Carpenter
Post by Palindrome
On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 04:38:16 -0800 (PST), Gene Stonerly
Post by Gene Stonerly
Or will you be searching forever in Everquest???
Everquest sounds like an unplayable game!!!
You sound like a fuckwit :)
2/10 for trolling. Can do better.
I bit generous, don't you think?
Well, it was short and to the point, and the spelling was ok :)


Palindrome
JK
2008-02-18 17:53:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gene Stonerly
Or will you be searching forever in Everquest???
Everquest sounds like an unplayable game!!!
Sony is doing their best to kill it. I've thought about going back, but
unless there's a button to make my main character level 80 with 1000 aa's to
spend, I just can't do anything in game. All the zones I'd go to would be
empty and I would not have the spells/levels/gear/aa's to be of use to any
current players.
Richard Carpenter
2008-02-18 21:33:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gene Stonerly
Or will you be searching forever in Everquest???
Everquest sounds like an unplayable game!!!
Sony is doing their best to kill it.  I've thought about going back, but
unless there's a button to make my main character level 80 with 1000 aa's to
spend, I just can't do anything in game.  All the zones I'd go to would be
empty and I would not have the spells/levels/gear/aa's to be of use to any
current players.
Nah. I find myself soloing often enough, but there are groups to be
had. As long as you're an appropriate level for the zone you're in,
people will find a use for you. The only time I have a bit of trouble
is when I need to put together a complete group for a specific task,
like my epic or something.

Also, it's about to get a lot easier to play AA catch-up. They're
getting ready to implement an AAxp curve that will give nice bonuses
to AAxp (like double) for those with fewer AA's.

--
Rich Carpenter
the wharf rat
2008-02-18 23:48:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Carpenter
Also, it's about to get a lot easier to play AA catch-up. They're
getting ready to implement an AAxp curve that will give nice bonuses
to AAxp (like double) for those with fewer AA's.
Ummmm, so, if I have 1200 AAs and I group with someone who has 2
that other guy gets more XP per hour than I do?

Doesn't seem fair :-)
RangerGirl
2008-02-19 20:50:44 UTC
Permalink
The curve plateaus out, not sure at what point as yet, but the person with
1200 AA will still end up moving through the higher volume of AA sooner than
the person playing catch up. With the number and spectrum of classes
changing as some players go into semi-retirement, this will allow the
remaining people to group more effectively whether it be with new mains or
support alts.

Not such a bad idea if SOE want to stabilise the player base and content
access.
Lunaren
2008-02-20 04:06:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gene Stonerly
Or will you be searching forever in Everquest???
Everquest sounds like an unplayable game!!!
Sony is doing their best to kill it. I've thought about going back, but
unless there's a button to make my main character level 80 with 1000 aa's to
spend, I just can't do anything in game. All the zones I'd go to would be
empty and I would not have the spells/levels/gear/aa's to be of use to any
current players.
Nah. I find myself soloing often enough, but there are groups to be
had. As long as you're an appropriate level for the zone you're in,
people will find a use for you. The only time I have a bit of trouble
is when I need to put together a complete group for a specific task,
like my epic or something.

Also, it's about to get a lot easier to play AA catch-up. They're
getting ready to implement an AAxp curve that will give nice bonuses
to AAxp (like double) for those with fewer AA's.

--
Rich Carpenter

That sounds good but they have done a lot that's hurt the game for me too
which that wouldn't begin to address. I haven't played for a bit now and it
seems like each break I return from, the return stay is shorter. :-(

I don't like the damned card game being foisted on players ingame. I don't
like the damned cards dropping off mobs and the fact that it is little more
than a way to extract more revenue from players wanting the ingame toys.
Most who buy cards don't even play the game. They want the mounts and
familiars and potions, etc. I truly hate all that. Once upon a time
EverQuest was a entirely an online ROLE PLAYING GAME. Gems was one thing.
LoN is just a bit much, a lot much. That's how I feel anyway and I know from
friends I am not alone in my disdain over that move. Smed talks business so
constantly he forgets about the fact that the entertainment needs to be of
the very highest possible quality first and the money will flow from that
accordingly. Say what you will about WoW but that sort of thing is something
Blizzard would not even consider, just as they reject RMT, etc. By the
numbers it appears Blizzard must be doing something right whether its one's
cup of tea or not.

I don't like the ridiculously complex armor that is now battery powered and
for which you need a calculator to consider the power factor across gear and
weapons and remove and replace a damned battery all the time which one has
to run missions to have currency for, else buy it. Battery powered epic
stats armor. Oh my God...

The game needed more to refine and improve what was always great about it
from the start and not constantly invent new and needless complexity with
each new expansion which seems to be the new norm of late. I for one am
sorry to see that.

I have never wanted to say this but I now see EverQuest as I once loved it
is gone and the game as a whole is well on the way to fading into a UO-like
obscurity.

I let my "investment" in my main and my nostalgia for fun, friends and times
gone by hold me for years but its just not enough while I watch the game go
to hell in a handbasket.

Such is the end of the road for MMOs I guess, not just EQ but any of them as
they age, populations dwindle, new ones come along, etc. The world we hoped
might never go away in mind largely already has. It pains me to say all
that. I loved EverQuest and I spent more time than I would want to admit to
in Norrath over some six years. Like someone else said my choices now are
play alone or grind till I can play with others. Neither is what the game
was ever meant to be and I guess I am simply not willing to pay those kind
of dues in terms of time to get to where the fun is.

They'd need to give away copious amounts of XP to fix that and in doing so
would of course be breaking a lot else. It's too late. It's terminal. :-(
Richard Carpenter
2008-02-20 19:51:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lunaren
I don't like the damned card game being foisted on players ingame. I don't
like the damned cards dropping off mobs and the fact that it is little more
than a way to extract more revenue from players wanting the ingame toys.
Most who buy cards don't even play the game. They want the mounts and
familiars and potions, etc. I truly hate all that.
I really don't see any impact from LoN. As a matter of fact, with the
cards dropping in the game, I've considered checking it out. I kind of
liked Magic the Gathering, though I never really played it much. I
could see where an EQ-themed game of that type would appeal to me. I
don't think it affects my experience in EQ, though. /shrug
Post by Lunaren
Once upon a time
EverQuest was a entirely an online ROLE PLAYING GAME. Gems was one thing.
LoN is just a bit much, a lot much. That's how I feel anyway and I know from
friends I am not alone in my disdain over that move. Smed talks business so
constantly he forgets about the fact that the entertainment needs to be of
the very highest possible quality first and the money will flow from that
accordingly. Say what you will about WoW but that sort of thing is something
Blizzard would not even consider, just as they reject RMT, etc. By the
numbers it appears Blizzard must be doing something right whether its one's
cup of tea or not.
They're doing something right, alright. It's called appealing to the
drooling masses (no offense to those upstanding, well-educated folk
who also enjoy WoW). I've often referred to WoW as the "cotton candy"
of MMORPG's. Some people really love the taste and just eat it all the
time. Others really like it at first but can only stomach so much.
Others just don't care for cotton candy. In any case, substantive is
most definitely not a term that should be used to describe it. It is
what it is, something simple and fun that appeals to a lot of people.
Chess and Monopoly appeal to a lot of people as well, but I wouldn't
pay a monthly fee to play them. ;)
Post by Lunaren
I don't like the ridiculously complex armor that is now battery powered and
for which you need a calculator to consider the power factor across gear and
weapons and remove and replace a damned battery all the time which one has
to run missions to have currency for, else buy it. Battery powered epic
stats armor. Oh my God...
Yeah, I thought the energetic stuff was kind of lame.
Post by Lunaren
The game needed more to refine and improve what was always great about it
from the start and not constantly invent new and needless complexity with
each new expansion which seems to be the new norm of late. I for one am
sorry to see that.
Complexity I like. It can make for a more rich game world and more
involving player experience. However, complexity for the sake of
itself it just a bad idea. I agree with you in that I just don't think
they needed to go there at that point. Deteriorating items have never
been a part of EQ. I don't understand why they feel that's a viable
game element.
Post by Lunaren
I have never wanted to say this but I now see EverQuest as I once loved it
is gone and the game as a whole is well on the way to fading into a UO-like
obscurity.
I let my "investment" in my main and my nostalgia for fun, friends and times
gone by hold me for years but its just not enough while I watch the game go
to hell in a handbasket.
Such is the end of the road for MMOs I guess, not just EQ but any of them as
they age, populations dwindle, new ones come along, etc. The world we hoped
might never go away in mind largely already has. It pains me to say all
that. I loved EverQuest and I spent more time than I would want to admit to
in Norrath over some six years. Like someone else said my choices now are
play alone or grind till I can play with others. Neither is what the game
was ever meant to be and I guess I am simply not willing to pay those kind
of dues in terms of time to get to where the fun is.
They'd need to give away copious amounts of XP to fix that and in doing so
would of course be breaking a lot else. It's too late. It's terminal. :-(
Well, I don't find it to be all *that* bleak. Sure, the population is
dwindling, but there is a difference between that trend in EQ vs. the
same in UO. I knew people who continued to play UO for years after it
was already considered washed up. They each only continued to play it
because it was free to play (on the shards they played on, anyway).
They didn't see any other MMORPG's worthy of a monthly fee. My brother
was one of those people. However, when I bought him the SoF box, he
gave it a try and was immediately hooked.

My point is, while the EQ population is a fraction of what it once
was, the people who still play are generally very enthusiastic about
the game - enough so to continue to pay a monthly fee, even though it
is largely considered well past its prime. Most of us have tried most
of the other MMORPG's that have come along over the past several
years, each time eventually returning to EQ.

WoW is doing something right, but it's not doing EQ, and that's what
keeps this group of players coming back. SoE needs to recognize that.

--
Richard Carpenter
murdocj
2008-02-23 14:51:01 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 11:51:05 -0800 (PST), Richard Carpenter
Post by Richard Carpenter
They're doing something right, alright. It's called appealing to the
drooling masses (no offense to those upstanding, well-educated folk
who also enjoy WoW). I've often referred to WoW as the "cotton candy"
of MMORPG's. Some people really love the taste and just eat it all the
time. Others really like it at first but can only stomach so much.
Others just don't care for cotton candy. In any case, substantive is
most definitely not a term that should be used to describe it. It is
what it is, something simple and fun that appeals to a lot of people.
Chess and Monopoly appeal to a lot of people as well, but I wouldn't
pay a monthly fee to play them. ;)
As someone who played Everquest for about 5 years, played EQ2 for a
few months, and played WoW from about a month after it came out till
right now, I wonder what your basis is for this comparison that
Everquest is for the educated elite, and WoW is for "the drooling
masses". I'm sorry, but I just don't see it, and whenever I've
challenged such a statement, I've never gotten back anything other
than "cause I say so".

Is it enormously easier to level in WoW than in EQ? Well, that's the
popular perception... but I wonder. I recall that when LDoN came out
in EQ, my enchanter was in his 40s. What I found was that 2 LDoNs
(say at most 3 hours) was a level. I can guarantee you that's faster
than my characters level in their 40s in WoW. It did get slower to
level via LDoN as I moved up, but even at 59 it was about 10 LDoNs per
level, maybe 10 hours (at most) which is comparable to WoW.

So... is EQ more complex than WoW? Better boss encounters? Better
back story? Better quests? Better crafting? Just saying that it
appeals to lots of people so it MUST be dumb doesn't work... by that
measure, Everquest, which was the 800 lb gorilla of its time, must
have also been dumbed down.

Ok, gotta go level my rogue... may we all enjoy the game of our
choice.

By the way... if you are comparing WoW to chess, I'm impressed... WoW
would certainly be in good company in that case!
Palindrome
2008-02-23 16:31:48 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 23 Feb 2008 14:51:01 GMT, murdocj
Post by murdocj
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 11:51:05 -0800 (PST), Richard Carpenter
Post by Richard Carpenter
They're doing something right, alright. It's called appealing to the
drooling masses (no offense to those upstanding, well-educated folk
who also enjoy WoW). I've often referred to WoW as the "cotton candy"
of MMORPG's. Some people really love the taste and just eat it all the
time. Others really like it at first but can only stomach so much.
Others just don't care for cotton candy. In any case, substantive is
most definitely not a term that should be used to describe it. It is
what it is, something simple and fun that appeals to a lot of people.
Chess and Monopoly appeal to a lot of people as well, but I wouldn't
pay a monthly fee to play them. ;)
As someone who played Everquest for about 5 years, played EQ2 for a
few months, and played WoW from about a month after it came out till
right now, I wonder what your basis is for this comparison that
Everquest is for the educated elite, and WoW is for "the drooling
masses". I'm sorry, but I just don't see it, and whenever I've
challenged such a statement, I've never gotten back anything other
than "cause I say so".
Sounds about right :D
Post by murdocj
Is it enormously easier to level in WoW than in EQ? Well, that's the
popular perception... but I wonder. I recall that when LDoN came out
in EQ, my enchanter was in his 40s. What I found was that 2 LDoNs
(say at most 3 hours) was a level. I can guarantee you that's faster
than my characters level in their 40s in WoW. It did get slower to
level via LDoN as I moved up, but even at 59 it was about 10 LDoNs per
level, maybe 10 hours (at most) which is comparable to WoW.
My lvl 28 made 16 levels in 2 days, and as you say, at first it was
around 2 levels per LDoN. Sony ram-raided XP to players to get them
all so high they could enjoy the new stuff. It really angered me to
have a game I loved become a "Monty Haul" joke. People were earning
AA points by the hundred, I kid you not! People who earned levels and
AA points the hard way were disgusted, at least in my guild and from
what I saw in OOC. Typical Sony balls-up.
Post by murdocj
So... is EQ more complex than WoW? Better boss encounters? Better
back story? Better quests? Better crafting? Just saying that it
appeals to lots of people so it MUST be dumb doesn't work... by that
measure, Everquest, which was the 800 lb gorilla of its time, must
have also been dumbed down.
Yeah - the MUD my pals and I played on the BBS was far more
sophisticated and much better suited to the gaming intelligentsia.
Graphics were for the poor drooling masses who lacked any imagination
whatsoever. :P (Sounds as stupid as his comment, you reckon? Maybe
not.)
Post by murdocj
By the way... if you are comparing WoW to chess, I'm impressed... WoW
would certainly be in good company in that case!
Making EQ the equivalent to Noughts and Crosses :D


Palindrome
Palindrome
2008-02-23 17:20:59 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 23 Feb 2008 16:31:48 +0000, Palindrome
Post by Palindrome
My lvl 28 made 16 levels in 2 days, and as you say, at first it was
around 2 levels per LDoN.
I meant 1 level per 2 LDoNs.


Palindrome
Don Woods
2008-02-28 00:21:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by murdocj
As someone who played Everquest for about 5 years, played EQ2 for a
few months, and played WoW from about a month after it came out till
right now, I wonder what your basis is for this comparison that
Everquest is for the educated elite, and WoW is for "the drooling
masses". I'm sorry, but I just don't see it, and whenever I've
challenged such a statement, I've never gotten back anything other
than "cause I say so".
Caveat: I've only played EQ (and LOTRO), but my wife and other RL friends
play WoW so I've heard a lot of descriptions. Still, my impressions are
only second-hand.

I think it's something of a misperception. Certainly some things are
easier in WoW than in EQ, and that's not necessarily bad. E.g., the
way they track your active quests and what step you're working on, EQ
eventually did something similar with the Task window, but it's still
pretty weak, and the limit of 15 Tasks is absurdly small. And I gather
that WoW generally does not use EQ's approach of forcing players to
camp place-holders for anywhere from 10 minutes to 100 hours to get a
rare named mob to spawn. (WoW does still have mindless grinding, esp.
for reputation (faction).) I've heard descriptions of some high-end
raids in WoW, and they're at least as complicated as the stuff I've
seen and heard about in EQ.

I think WoW's reputation stems in part from the easier questing system
and such attracting a wider variety of players, so it has collected a
larger share of jerks and idiots, who tend to stand out and about whom
many horror stories are told. But it certainly also has lots of skilled,
intelligent players. If I had time to play two games I'd undoubtedly
give it a try, but as it is I don't even have all the time I'd like for
EQ, and have no urge to start over.
Schadenfreude
2008-02-28 15:12:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Woods
I think it's something of a misperception. Certainly some things are
easier in WoW than in EQ, and that's not necessarily bad. E.g., the
Everything is easier in WoW. Contrast and compare two broadly
comparable classes the Beastlord in EQ and the Hunter in WoW.

In WoW with gear that I looted off mobs and random cheap AH items I
can tear through endless mobs including Elites often up to 3 or 4 at a
time with only the odd death to show for it which in WoW is painless
enough to shrug off. Add a second player of almost any class and
virtually every quest is possible. Even solo most quests can be
knocked out no problem for often ludicrous amounts of extra
experience.

In EQ with expensive gear from the latest expansion right near the
best that can be obtained from the bazaar I can be killed in melee by
a single (slowed) mob multiple levels below me. If I back off and
let my buffed pet tank while I frantically heal it and then myself I
can resume meleeing but it's risky and time consuming.

In WoW family guilds (super casual players, young kids and the like)
can do older raid content and win. My old guild do this. Even many
expansions old EQ content like Tacvi is too unforgiving for you to be
able to do similar things in EQ hence the WoW-esque introduction of
better quality bazaar gear with the last expansion.

I'm sure WoW raiding at the very bleeding edge is much like EQ was a
couple of expansions ago but a good chunk of EQ raid content remains
untouched (it's almost certainly not tuned but that's another thread.)
--
Schadenfreude of Bristlebane
***@hotmail.com
murdocj
2008-03-01 17:54:37 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 15:12:55 +0000, Schadenfreude
Post by Schadenfreude
Post by Don Woods
I think it's something of a misperception. Certainly some things are
easier in WoW than in EQ, and that's not necessarily bad. E.g., the
Everything is easier in WoW. Contrast and compare two broadly
comparable classes the Beastlord in EQ and the Hunter in WoW.
Well, that's the misperception. Many things are easier in EQ than
WoW. For example, travel. Click on a stone in PoK and you're there.
In WoW there are a few mage ports to major cities, but basically you
want to get somewhere, you fly, and it takes time.
Post by Schadenfreude
In WoW with gear that I looted off mobs and random cheap AH items I
can tear through endless mobs including Elites often up to 3 or 4 at a
time with only the odd death to show for it which in WoW is painless
enough to shrug off.
The "death is less painful in WoW than in EQ" argument is also a
misperception. In fact, in EQ, you get a rez (which at the higher
levels you almost always get) and death is free. In WoW, death
*always* costs you, and if you've got decent gear, it costs you a fair
bit.
Post by Schadenfreude
Add a second player of almost any class and
virtually every quest is possible. Even solo most quests can be
knocked out no problem for often ludicrous amounts of extra
experience.
Well, every quest that isn't a 5 man quest. WoW is certainly more
"solo / duo" friendly than EQ, or at least than EQ used to be.
Post by Schadenfreude
...
In WoW family guilds (super casual players, young kids and the like)
can do older raid content and win. My old guild do this. Even many
expansions old EQ content like Tacvi is too unforgiving for you to be
able to do similar things in EQ hence the WoW-esque introduction of
better quality bazaar gear with the last expansion.
I'm sure WoW raiding at the very bleeding edge is much like EQ was a
couple of expansions ago but a good chunk of EQ raid content remains
untouched (it's almost certainly not tuned but that's another thread.)
I'm assuming you never got to the upper level raids of the original
WoW content, or the Outlands raids like Kara. Those raids require
very well coordinated groups that execute strategies to perfection. I
would be extremely surprised if EQ has more demanding content. For
example, in the Kara Moroes fight, losing CC on a single add means a
wipe, and since the event is on a timer, a pretty good chance that you
are going to have to clear to the boss.
murdocj
2008-03-01 18:24:28 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 17:54:37 GMT, murdocj
Post by murdocj
On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 15:12:55 +0000, Schadenfreude
Post by Schadenfreude
Post by Don Woods
I think it's something of a misperception. Certainly some things are
easier in WoW than in EQ, and that's not necessarily bad. E.g., the
Everything is easier in WoW. Contrast and compare two broadly
comparable classes the Beastlord in EQ and the Hunter in WoW.
Well, that's the misperception. Many things are easier in EQ than
WoW. For example, travel. Click on a stone in PoK and you're there.
In WoW there are a few mage ports to major cities, but basically you
want to get somewhere, you fly, and it takes time.
Post by Schadenfreude
In WoW with gear that I looted off mobs and random cheap AH items I
can tear through endless mobs including Elites often up to 3 or 4 at a
time with only the odd death to show for it which in WoW is painless
enough to shrug off.
The "death is less painful in WoW than in EQ" argument is also a
misperception. In fact, in EQ, you get a rez (which at the higher
levels you almost always get) and death is free. In WoW, death
*always* costs you, and if you've got decent gear, it costs you a fair
bit.
Post by Schadenfreude
Add a second player of almost any class and
virtually every quest is possible. Even solo most quests can be
knocked out no problem for often ludicrous amounts of extra
experience.
Well, every quest that isn't a 5 man quest. WoW is certainly more
"solo / duo" friendly than EQ, or at least than EQ used to be.
Post by Schadenfreude
...
In WoW family guilds (super casual players, young kids and the like)
can do older raid content and win. My old guild do this. Even many
expansions old EQ content like Tacvi is too unforgiving for you to be
able to do similar things in EQ hence the WoW-esque introduction of
better quality bazaar gear with the last expansion.
I'm sure WoW raiding at the very bleeding edge is much like EQ was a
couple of expansions ago but a good chunk of EQ raid content remains
untouched (it's almost certainly not tuned but that's another thread.)
I'm assuming you never got to the upper level raids of the original
WoW content, or the Outlands raids like Kara. Those raids require
very well coordinated groups that execute strategies to perfection. I
would be extremely surprised if EQ has more demanding content. For
example, in the Kara Moroes fight, losing CC on a single add means a
wipe, and since the event is on a timer, a pretty good chance that you
are going to have to clear to the boss.
I was thinking about this a little more while shoveling snow
(something I get to do a lot this winter) and I think the core problem
is that experienced EQ players who try WoW are comparing level 70 EQ
play against level 20-30 WoW. And obviously at that point, WoW is a
lot easier. If you did the reverse, well, you'd come to the opposite
conclusion.
Palindrome
2008-03-01 18:50:00 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 18:24:28 GMT, murdocj
Post by murdocj
I was thinking about this a little more while shoveling snow
(something I get to do a lot this winter) and I think the core problem
is that experienced EQ players who try WoW are comparing level 70 EQ
play against level 20-30 WoW. And obviously at that point, WoW is a
lot easier. If you did the reverse, well, you'd come to the opposite
conclusion.
Pretty good point. I got fed up with EQ when my lvl 70 Beastlord
couldn't even solo a light blue/green in the latest zones. My pal's
Druid who had several thousand AA points (I just don't have his dogged
determination) and excellent gear as often as not had to flee a zone
as he couldn't do likewise.

If the player numbers had been there to group with, that would have
been fine, but the most you saw/heard in EQ zones was tumbleweed and
crickets. I just got sick of having to try and solo.

After that, ANYTHING seems easier.


Palindrome
U***@hotmail.com
2008-03-03 05:18:46 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 18:50:00 +0000, Palindrome
Post by Palindrome
On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 18:24:28 GMT, murdocj
Post by murdocj
I was thinking about this a little more while shoveling snow
(something I get to do a lot this winter) and I think the core problem
is that experienced EQ players who try WoW are comparing level 70 EQ
play against level 20-30 WoW. And obviously at that point, WoW is a
lot easier. If you did the reverse, well, you'd come to the opposite
conclusion.
Pretty good point. I got fed up with EQ when my lvl 70 Beastlord
couldn't even solo a light blue/green in the latest zones.
Cant follow you with the 70 Beastlord,they get slow AND snare(as a
proc from pet),to my knowledge the only class with this combination
of abilities,in fact seeing Bsts totally overpwoered was one of the
(very minor) reasons I quit.
Post by Palindrome
My pal's
Druid who had several thousand AA points (I just don't have his dogged
determination) and excellent gear as often as not had to flee a zone
as he couldn't do likewise.
And who has ever heard of a Druid not being able to solo,not to speak
of one with "several thousnad AA points" ?
Post by Palindrome
If the player numbers had been there to group with, that would have
been fine, but the most you saw/heard in EQ zones was tumbleweed and
crickets. I just got sick of having to try and solo.
I agree,finding pick up groups in EQ1 has become harder and harder,
with DoN it even became worse,players only wanted to do the instance
they need for progression,quite dumb if you ask me,lfg for hours
for a special zone instead of being a little flexible and get at least
some xp and who knows a somewhat valuable drop.
Post by Palindrome
After that, ANYTHING seems easier.
and less rewarding in the long run.
Playing EQ2 on a rl friends account I had several burn out phases
already in the 5 months since I started it because the "difficulty "
level is simply much too low,and xping just a joke,one can solo
easily from 1 to 80 with a *Cleric* class.
Its the other extreme compared to EQ1,but I defintly would prefere
EQ1 cause its much more rewarding in the long run.
Sadly I am so p...ed about all those lieing and holding players on
by SOE I will never again pay for a SOE game.
the wharf rat
2008-03-03 07:10:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by U***@hotmail.com
And who has ever heard of a Druid not being able to solo,not to speak
of one with "several thousnad AA points" ?
There was a period when ALL the mobs in EVERY new zone summoned,
making druid-ness rather frustrating. Much better now, with Icefall,
Loping, and etc.
Palindrome
2008-03-03 10:14:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by the wharf rat
Post by U***@hotmail.com
And who has ever heard of a Druid not being able to solo,not to speak
of one with "several thousnad AA points" ?
There was a period when ALL the mobs in EVERY new zone summoned,
making druid-ness rather frustrating. Much better now, with Icefall,
Loping, and etc.
Lol, yes, you reminded me of his pet gripe! I didn't really like it
much myself as a Beastlord, either. We both got fed up and quit EQ,
which was a shame after the years we'd logged, and left for pastures
new. Never regretted it.


Palindrome
Richard Carpenter
2008-03-06 02:38:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by U***@hotmail.com
On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 18:50:00 +0000, Palindrome
Post by Palindrome
After that, ANYTHING seems easier.
and less rewarding in the long run.
That pretty well sums it up.

--
Richard Carpenter
marika
2008-03-07 03:08:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by murdocj
I was thinking about this a little more while shoveling snow
(something I get to do a lot this winter) and I think the core problem
is that experienced EQ players who try WoW are comparing level 70 EQ
play against level 20-30 WoW. And obviously at that point, WoW is a
lot easier. If you did the reverse, well, you'd come to the opposite
conclusion.
Sir Counselot!

mk5000




"Building with bent nails we're
falling but holding, I don't wanna take up anymore of your time
Time time time
Sometimes time doesn't heal"--Jack Johnson, If I had Eyes
Schadenfreude
2008-03-08 02:56:49 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 17:54:37 GMT, murdocj
Post by murdocj
Well, that's the misperception. Many things are easier in EQ than
WoW. For example, travel. Click on a stone in PoK and you're there.
In WoW there are a few mage ports to major cities, but basically you
want to get somewhere, you fly, and it takes time.
Ah yes click on a stone in PoK and you're at the Ashengate zone in....
err no actually wait a second.
Post by murdocj
Post by Schadenfreude
In WoW with gear that I looted off mobs and random cheap AH items I
can tear through endless mobs including Elites often up to 3 or 4 at a
time with only the odd death to show for it which in WoW is painless
enough to shrug off.
The "death is less painful in WoW than in EQ" argument is also a
misperception. In fact, in EQ, you get a rez (which at the higher
levels you almost always get) and death is free. In WoW, death
*always* costs you, and if you've got decent gear, it costs you a fair
bit.
Death is meaningless in WoW unless you're talking about multiple raid
deaths in top end raid gear which hits only your wallet. Money is so
easily acquired I fail to see how even four or five deaths in a day
doing normal quests or xp could even be remotely considered anything
other than a minor inconvenience.

In EQ if you die and don't have a rezzer in group (or the group wipes)
then you're faced with summoning your corpse to lobby (which actually
is fairly costly now at level 80) before you can even think about
begging for or paying someone for rez. Even then you'll start to see
measurable xp loss after a few 96% rezzes.

I don't think it's by accident that I know people who quit EQ for WoW
who are now are on their 4th or 5th level 70 WoW character yet never
even made level 70 on their years old 'main' in EQ. All their WoW
chars have uber (sic) levels of tradeskills etc while 99% of them
didn't do any in EQ etc.
Post by murdocj
Post by Schadenfreude
I'm sure WoW raiding at the very bleeding edge is much like EQ was a
couple of expansions ago but a good chunk of EQ raid content remains
untouched (it's almost certainly not tuned but that's another thread.)
I'm assuming you never got to the upper level raids of the original
WoW content, or the Outlands raids like Kara. Those raids require
very well coordinated groups that execute strategies to perfection. I
would be extremely surprised if EQ has more demanding content. For
example, in the Kara Moroes fight, losing CC on a single add means a
wipe, and since the event is on a timer, a pretty good chance that you
are going to have to clear to the boss.
Reading comprehension for the win. My old guild do Karazhan and they
all quit EQ having done nothing beyond Vex Thal, Sleepers and a chunk
of PoP pre Time.
--
Schadenfreude of Bristlebane
***@hotmail.com
U***@hotmail.com
2008-03-02 06:29:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Woods
so it has collected a
larger share of jerks and idiots
Sadly this is true in my experience on a *RPG* server and made me quit
forever after only 4 weeks although I had paid for 6 months.
Hearing people talk about the consistence of their *shit* in a public
channel on a RPG server was the last nail in the coffin,I am not
exaggerating or joking. :(
Other than that I really liked WoW,especially its great stabiltiy and
bugless state it was released with,I played shortly after release.
EQ1/2 looks like an Alpha product compared to WoW in regards
of bugs and stability.
Maybe SOE should look at those issues instead of making the games
so easy that my hamster could play them,especially EQ2,to attract
more players.
Richard Carpenter
2008-03-06 02:34:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by U***@hotmail.com
Post by Don Woods
so it has collected a
larger share of jerks and idiots
Sadly this is true in my experience on a *RPG* server and made me quit
forever after only 4 weeks although I had paid for 6 months.
Hearing people talk about the consistence of their *shit* in a public
channel on a RPG server was the last nail in the coffin,I am not
exaggerating or joking.  :(
Other than that I really liked WoW,especially its great stabiltiy and
bugless state it was released with,I played shortly after release.
EQ1/2 looks like an Alpha product compared to WoW in regards
of bugs and stability.
Maybe SOE should look at those issues instead of making the games
so easy that my hamster could play them,especially EQ2,to attract
more players.
Actually, I was there when WoW launched, and I found it similar (but
not quite as bad) to the SWG launch, in that, while there may not have
been a vast *number* of bugs (though they both had their share), the
bugs that did exist were pretty close to show-stoppers. In SWG there
was the disappearing bank/inventory items and server crashes. In WoW
there was the nasty, and I do mean *nasty*, lag spikes (can you say
stuck loot window?) and general server instability. I've seen bugs
that affected certain aspects of EQ (bugged quests, spells that didn't
work, etc.), but I can't recall any that just made me want to not play
until they were fixed.

--
Richard Carpenter
murdocj
2008-03-06 04:28:15 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 18:34:47 -0800 (PST), Richard Carpenter
Post by Richard Carpenter
Post by U***@hotmail.com
Post by Don Woods
so it has collected a
larger share of jerks and idiots
Sadly this is true in my experience on a *RPG* server and made me quit
forever after only 4 weeks although I had paid for 6 months.
Hearing people talk about the consistence of their *shit* in a public
channel on a RPG server was the last nail in the coffin,I am not
exaggerating or joking.  :(
Other than that I really liked WoW,especially its great stabiltiy and
bugless state it was released with,I played shortly after release.
EQ1/2 looks like an Alpha product compared to WoW in regards
of bugs and stability.
Maybe SOE should look at those issues instead of making the games
so easy that my hamster could play them,especially EQ2,to attract
more players.
Actually, I was there when WoW launched, and I found it similar (but
not quite as bad) to the SWG launch, in that, while there may not have
been a vast *number* of bugs (though they both had their share), the
bugs that did exist were pretty close to show-stoppers. In SWG there
was the disappearing bank/inventory items and server crashes. In WoW
there was the nasty, and I do mean *nasty*, lag spikes (can you say
stuck loot window?) and general server instability. I've seen bugs
that affected certain aspects of EQ (bugged quests, spells that didn't
work, etc.), but I can't recall any that just made me want to not play
until they were fixed.
That's rather different from my experience with WoW and EQ. I started
playing WoW a month after launch, and I'd have to say it's been
extremely stable and bug free. EQ1 had quite a few bugs... none that
made me want to not play but stuff like waiting for the boats and
having no idea if they would ever show up... quests that you would
start and then find out that they were broken... areas where you
weren't supposed to stand and fight because the pathing was broken and
fighting there would be considered an exploit, etc etc etc.

My favorite one was doing a spell combine and having the results poof
because it was lore and I already had a copy in the bank. wouldn't
have mattered so much except that the only copy of that spell on the
bazaar was listed at 18,000 plat Having it poof was kinda
unfortunate.

And of course there was the incredible bazaar lag where you had to
look at a wall or the floor in order to be able to do anything.

I haven't encountered anything remotely this bad on WoW. It's not
perfect, but it's definitely a step up in stability.
Richard Carpenter
2008-03-06 02:21:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by murdocj
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 11:51:05 -0800 (PST), Richard Carpenter
Post by Richard Carpenter
They're doing something right, alright. It's called appealing to the
drooling masses (no offense to those upstanding, well-educated folk
who also enjoy WoW). I've often referred to WoW as the "cotton candy"
of MMORPG's. Some people really love the taste and just eat it all the
time. Others really like it at first but can only stomach so much.
Others just don't care for cotton candy. In any case, substantive is
most definitely not a term that should be used to describe it. It is
what it is, something simple and fun that appeals to a lot of people.
Chess and Monopoly appeal to a lot of people as well, but I wouldn't
pay a monthly fee to play them. ;)
As someone who played Everquest for about 5 years, played EQ2 for a
few months, and played WoW from about a month after it came out till
right now, I wonder what your basis is for this comparison that
Everquest is for the educated elite, and WoW is for "the drooling
masses".  I'm sorry, but I just don't see it, and whenever I've
challenged such a statement, I've never gotten back anything other
than "cause I say so".
Simple, WoW promotes accessibility to a fault. Character progression
in WoW is just...easy. You don't have to group. You hardly have to
think. Tradeskills are automatically acquired. All you have to do is
skin what you kill or loot every applicable harvestable you find along
the way, and the crafting process itself is overly simplified. Classes
balanced for PvP are boring. None can have any sort of "cool"
abilities for fear of upsetting that balance. There are too few
classes (in the interest of further facilitating class balancing).
Skills customization amounts to earning points to spend to increase
the damage of your nukes by 1.6% or something silly per rank.

Besides, I think you're being a bit overly sensitive to my "drooling
masses" comment. It has been my experience that the percentage of the
WoW population that would fall into that category is *much* higher
than in EQ. I even went on to clarify that I am completely aware that
segment does not comprise all WoW players. Basically, if the shoe
fits... /shrug
Post by murdocj
Is it enormously easier to level in WoW than in EQ?  Well, that's the
popular perception... but I wonder.  I recall that when LDoN came out
in EQ, my enchanter was in his 40s.  What I found was that 2 LDoNs
(say at most 3 hours) was a level.  I can guarantee you that's faster
than my characters level in their 40s in WoW.  It did get slower to
level via LDoN as I moved up, but even at 59 it was about 10 LDoNs per
level, maybe 10 hours (at most) which is comparable to WoW.
Uh huh. How many players were required for that to happen? In WoW, you
can do it all by yourself as in it's not as difficult as in it's
easier.
Post by murdocj
So... is EQ more complex than WoW?  Better boss encounters?  
IMO, yes.
Post by murdocj
Better back story?  
Yup, and much more of it.
Post by murdocj
Better quests?  
Easily. Every MMORPG should take a cue from the epic quests in EQ.
Beyond that, FedEx and Kill x Mobs quests are offered a-plenty by both
games.
Post by murdocj
Better crafting?
It's no worse from the actual crafting standpoint, but, as I mentioned
above, the elements that support crafting, from obtaining the
components to the chance of actually (*gasp*) failing a combine do
make for a more compelling system.
Post by murdocj
Just saying that it appeals to lots of people so it MUST be dumb doesn't work... by that
measure, Everquest, which was the 800 lb gorilla of its time, must
have also been dumbed down.
You're putting a few words into my mouth there. WoW appeals more to
the least common denominator. Let's just leave it at that. Again, of
course there are plenty of fine, upstanding folks playing it as well,
but it is at the same time most *definitely* the preferred playground
for the "drooling masses".
Post by murdocj
Ok, gotta go level my rogue... may we all enjoy the game of our
choice.
Absolutely.
Post by murdocj
By the way... if you are comparing WoW to chess, I'm impressed... WoW
would certainly be in good company in that case!
Perhaps, but like I said, would you pay $15/mo. to play chess? I
wouldn't, though I do like chess. /shrug

--
Richard Carpenter
murdocj
2008-03-06 04:39:57 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 18:21:33 -0800 (PST), Richard Carpenter
Post by Richard Carpenter
None can have any sort of "cool"
abilities for fear of upsetting that balance. There are too few
classes (in the interest of further facilitating class balancing).
I'd say exactly the opposite. I've played a priest, a hunter, a mage
and a rogue and each has had really amazing strengths (and
weaknesses). Each one has been different and unique and interesting.
EQ's classes felt a bit cookie cutter... like theEQ designers felt
the need for a new class so they took a little bit from this existing
class and a little bit from that class.
Post by Richard Carpenter
Skills customization amounts to earning points to spend to increase
the damage of your nukes by 1.6% or something silly per rank.
Nope. Not even close. Consider the difference between a shadow
priest and a holy priest. One is a face melting damage dealer... the
other takes forever to kill things, but is a top notch healer. Both
priests, but they've taken different talents. And unlike EQ, you
can't just play a lot and get all the talents. You have to make
choices. Hard choices.
Post by Richard Carpenter
Besides, I think you're being a bit overly sensitive to my "drooling
masses" comment. It has been my experience that the percentage of the
WoW population that would fall into that category is *much* higher
than in EQ. I even went on to clarify that I am completely aware that
segment does not comprise all WoW players. Basically, if the shoe
fits... /shrug
I'm not particularly sensitive about it... you're just wrong.
Richard Carpenter
2008-03-07 03:54:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by murdocj
On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 18:21:33 -0800 (PST), Richard Carpenter
Post by Richard Carpenter
None can have any sort of "cool"
abilities for fear of upsetting that balance. There are too few
classes (in the interest of further facilitating class balancing).
I'd say exactly the opposite.  I've played a priest, a hunter, a mage
and a rogue and each has had really amazing strengths (and
weaknesses).  Each one has been different and unique and interesting.
EQ's classes felt a bit cookie cutter... like theEQ  designers felt
the need for a new class so they took a little bit from this existing
class and a little bit from that class.  
Well, that certainly applies where the beastlord class is concerned.
Aside from that...um, no. (though I wasn't particularly impressed by
the berserker class, either)
Post by murdocj
Post by Richard Carpenter
Skills customization amounts to earning points to spend to increase
the damage of your nukes by 1.6% or something silly per rank.
Nope.  Not even close.  Consider the difference between a shadow
priest and a holy priest.  One is a face melting damage dealer... the
other takes forever to kill things, but is a top notch healer.  Both
priests, but they've taken different talents.  And unlike EQ, you
can't just play a lot and get all the talents.  You have to make
choices.  Hard choices.
Pfft. "face melting" /rolleyes

Anyway, WoW class diversity strikes me as little more than DPS and
healing. If you're a healer you heal. If you're not, you DPS. They
call the various skills and spells by different names, and they have
different graphical effects, but you're still just applying damage,
button press by button press. It just pales in comparison with regard
to combat. In EQ, depending upon the class you play, there can be
several different tactics employed on different types of mobs given
different circumstances. There isn't much to think about in WoW. Hit
the same few buttons (the three or so that do the most damage) over
and over on just about any mob.
Post by murdocj
Post by Richard Carpenter
Besides, I think you're being a bit overly sensitive to my "drooling
masses" comment. It has been my experience that the percentage of the
WoW population that would fall into that category is *much* higher
than in EQ. I even went on to clarify that I am completely aware that
segment does not comprise all WoW players. Basically, if the shoe
fits... /shrug
I'm not particularly sensitive about it... you're just wrong.  
If you say so. All I've got to go on is my own first hand experiences.

--
Richard Carpenter
U***@hotmail.com
2008-03-07 05:20:18 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 6 Mar 2008 19:54:20 -0800 (PST), Richard Carpenter
Post by Richard Carpenter
In EQ, depending upon the class you play, there can be
several different tactics employed on different types of mobs given
different circumstances.
Loved to pull during LDoN era with my Cleric. :)
Man,you should see how uninteresting pulling is in EQ2,it's the
TANK's job,there is exactly *one* technique,tank approaches
a group of mobs and hopes not to get too much aggro.
1 pulling class + 1 technique surely makes for great diversity,lol.
Sorry for hijacking a thread about EQ1 and Wow,but I still cant
get over how unbeleivably they have dumbed down the game play in EQ2.
Thinking that they took my monthly fees from EQ1 to develope
this piece of boring crap still makes me want to pull my hairs out.
Just entered a 2nd phase in only 5 months with a seriuos burn out -
I deleted EQ2 from my harddisk 2 days ago,note a rl friend let me
play for FREE on his 2nd account.

*starts Diablo2*
Don Woods
2008-03-08 01:05:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Carpenter
Anyway, WoW class diversity strikes me as little more than DPS and
healing. If you're a healer you heal. If you're not, you DPS. They
call the various skills and spells by different names, and they have
different graphical effects, but you're still just applying damage,
button press by button press. It just pales in comparison with regard
to combat. In EQ, depending upon the class you play, there can be
several different tactics employed on different types of mobs given
different circumstances. There isn't much to think about in WoW. Hit
the same few buttons (the three or so that do the most damage) over
and over on just about any mob.
Hell, I've never even played WoW but I'll call bullshit on this one.
(I *have* heard my wife and other friends discuss it ad nauseum. :-)
There are certainly more variations than just healing vs DPS, though
I don't know which classes have which choices. But warriors can be
spec'ed for DPS or for tanking, and there may be other choices (either
a combination of DPS and tankage, or other axes entirely, I don't know).

And frankly, I find combats in EQ are often closer to the "same few
buttons" approach. Sure, if I'm in a group I may have to adapt to
situations when we have adds or a mob has a DS or summons or whatever.
But in a raid battle when all I care about is DPS, I mostly play
whack-a-mole with the same few buttons, plus throwing in a few combat
discs (where I usually have to choose between discs that share a
cooldown timer). And yes, some tactics change depending on the mob,
and I'm sure the tanks have more choices to think about. But I think
both games have their share of "fall into the rhythm and grind out the
fight".

Mostly, I suspect that neither game can be fairly evaluated except by
someone who's played it at the higher levels.

-- Don.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- See the a.g.e/EQ1 FAQ at http://www.iCynic.com/~don/EQ/age.faq.htm
--
-- Sukrasisx, Monk 75 on E. Marr Note: If you reply by mail,
-- Terrwini, Druid 60 on E. Marr I'll get to it sooner if you
-- Teviron, Knight 59 on E. Marr remove the "hyphen n s"
-- Wizbeau, Wizard 36 on E. Marr
Richard Carpenter
2008-03-08 01:26:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Woods
Post by Richard Carpenter
Anyway, WoW class diversity strikes me as little more than DPS and
healing. If you're a healer you heal. If you're not, you DPS. They
call the various skills and spells by different names, and they have
different graphical effects, but you're still just applying damage,
button press by button press. It just pales in comparison with regard
to combat. In EQ, depending upon the class you play, there can be
several different tactics employed on different types of mobs given
different circumstances. There isn't much to think about in WoW. Hit
the same few buttons (the three or so that do the most damage) over
and over on just about any mob.
Hell, I've never even played WoW but I'll call bullshit on this one.
(I *have* heard my wife and other friends discuss it ad nauseum. :-)
There are certainly more variations than just healing vs DPS, though
I don't know which classes have which choices.  But warriors can be
spec'ed for DPS or for tanking, and there may be other choices (either
a combination of DPS and tankage, or other axes entirely, I don't know).
Sure, it was perhaps an oversimplification, but the point holds true.
Add tanking as a third function, and you've got the game mechanic
that, while all MMORPG's are based on it, is not developed nearly to
the degree that it is in EQ. It's just watered down.
Post by Don Woods
And frankly, I find combats in EQ are often closer to the "same few
buttons" approach.  Sure, if I'm in a group I may have to adapt to
situations when we have adds or a mob has a DS or summons or whatever.
But in a raid battle when all I care about is DPS, I mostly play
whack-a-mole with the same few buttons, plus throwing in a few combat
discs (where I usually have to choose between discs that share a
cooldown timer).  And yes, some tactics change depending on the mob,
and I'm sure the tanks have more choices to think about.  But I think
both games have their share of "fall into the rhythm and grind out the
fight".
Raids have their purpose: gearing up. Even though raiding seems to be
the primary focus of the devs these days, it's hardly what defines EQ,
IMO. As you say, it tends to reduce players' roles a bit depending on
the target mob. However, when you're talking about 40 players being
involved, playing your respective role is the logical tactical
approach.

Step away from that, however, and you've got the group/solo
experience, where all your tricks are required, unless you're content
to stick to content that offers little risk. In the latter case, yeah,
you become a button masher.
Post by Don Woods
Mostly, I suspect that neither game can be fairly evaluated except by
someone who's played it at the higher levels.
Yet you chime in having "never even played WoW"? ;)

--
Richard Carpenter
Schadenfreude
2008-03-08 02:37:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Woods
And frankly, I find combats in EQ are often closer to the "same few
buttons" approach. Sure, if I'm in a group I may have to adapt to
situations when we have adds or a mob has a DS or summons or whatever.
But in a raid battle when all I care about is DPS, I mostly play
whack-a-mole with the same few buttons, plus throwing in a few combat
discs (where I usually have to choose between discs that share a
cooldown timer). And yes, some tactics change depending on the mob,
and I'm sure the tanks have more choices to think about. But I think
both games have their share of "fall into the rhythm and grind out the
fight".
Well I *HAVE* played both games (still have an active WoW account in
fact because a lot of my old EQ friends play it) and I've found WoW
combat much easier and more straightforward.

How to solo a mob as a Hunter:

Send pet in.
Shoot.

Two keys.

How to solo two mobs as a Hunter:

Send pet in on mob A.
Shoot mob B.
Set trap.
Trap mob B.
Shoot mob A.
Wait until pet kills mob A.
Send pet in on mob B.
Heal pet (usually not required, mind you)
Shoot mob B.

My Hunter isn't level 70 purely and simply because I don't play him
often enough due to the fact that - and whisper this - levelling him
is unchallenging and things I find unchallenging bore me.
--
Schadenfreude of Bristlebane
***@hotmail.com
murdocj
2008-03-18 03:04:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Woods
Hell, I've never even played WoW but I'll call bullshit on this one.
(I *have* heard my wife and other friends discuss it ad nauseum. :-)
There are certainly more variations than just healing vs DPS, though
I don't know which classes have which choices. But warriors can be
spec'ed for DPS or for tanking, and there may be other choices (either
a combination of DPS and tankage, or other axes entirely, I don't know).
By coincidence a podcast I listen to (World of Warcast) just had a
roundtable on druids, which are a very flexible class. Based on the
talent spec, they can be DPS, top end tank, or top end healer. If you
are curious (I suspect you aren't THAT curious) their site is
http://worldofwarcast.com/

Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...