Class opinions

where does everyone stand on the current classes/skills? which ones are OP, which are UP?please, provide discussion and suggestions too. im curious.

i know this has been beaten like a dead horse, but, zerks.

i think that some problems might be solved if rage did a little more. as it is, the major class feature of zerkers is more harmful than helpful, in many cases. yes i know it is meant to be a double-edged sword, but, for such an important skill, it seems to backfire more than it really helps. my suggestion is maybe add a slight haste. or increase the number of possible attacks by one, but make that extra attack autolearned, yet untrainable (stuck at 75, or perhaps slightly lower).

warriors. for a 0xp penalty, they are extremely viable, often more so than other melee classes, even ones with xp penalties. this is a tough one to me. i would like to see the weapon lores revamped. it seems that most everyone chooses whip nowadays.

bards. useless songs. they have a few, it seems. whats the point? i could understand if serenade made mobs in the area sightly less aggressive. i favor getting rid of marriage song.

monks. seem rather solid actually. i dont quite know what to think of a few stances. ive heard that some stances are pointless, only to find that one of them is actually a key stance. from a PK standpoint, definately shouldnt have made one being new.

blademasters. it seems as if some of the stances are hardly useful, or perhaps might not warrant the entire duration of the stance. but then, i cant really judge, being new.

input here would be fantastic

To be honest, I don't think there are any classes right now that are truly under- or over-powered. Tweaking is always a good thing, because perfect balance is an ideal rather than an achievable reality, but I think the classes are for the most part in pretty good shape these days.

To counter a couple of your examples... zerks. I don't play pure melees much and I've only pinned one zerk in my FL career years ago, so everything I can say here is second-hand... but all of the people I talk to who do play zerks say they felt the class was just fine, that while minor tweaks could be used here and there it is solid and doesn't need any major fixing.

Warriors I think are just fine as they are, other than perhaps some of the warrior lores being improved (I'm not really in favor of any current ones being weakened - whip lore I do not think is the perfect choice many seem to believe it to be, and I've had little trouble dealing with it). Shield mastery in particular seems to be a bit poor in comparison with some of the others, but that opinion I base on my estimation of its effectiveness rather than my testing of it, so I could be wrong.

Bards were never meant to be a PK-heavy class, and I've never been fully in favor of attempts to turn them into one. I like them being primarily RP characters - they bring a lot to the mud. Their lack of PK prowess brings them certain advantages too... their combination of dirt kick, dual wield and songs makes them great groupmates and people generally treat them with a little less hostility than other classes.

Monks... I don't think they need any real toning either way, but I've never liked the design of monks being so centered around the lag game. I'd love to see them completely redesigned... but that's a big change, and unlikely to happen, so I don't try to push it much.

Blademasters are just fine by my reckoning.

agreed on many points. i do believe zerks are slightly underpowered. but nothing truly major. slight tweaks would go a long way.

im not for weakening lores myself. if some others were made stronger, like shield, people would pick them more.

i can understand your idea on monks, actually. what exactly did you have in mind?

yeah blademasters are pretty solid. there are one or two stances i dont really see much of a point to making an entire stance for. but then, i can see why its done. i would think that its a balance issue, as the utility in its own would be pretty powerful, espcially if it could be used with a stance. so i would guess that the reason they are stances is to both prevent you from taking a second stance, as well as force you to devote yourself to that decision for a good while. i actually liked my BM. got close to pinn before shelving. fun character i wanna try again sometime, im just not skilled enough for the class yet

I think BLMs are the most viable class for PK, comparable only by Shaman.

BLMs also have the least amount of banes of any class I've seen.

Talking about Zerks. While I agree, they do not need any major boost, they just need their abilities to become reliable. In fact, if their abilities actually worked I wouldn't see much of a problem. Except that I feel the roar change should have affected every path, not just one or two.

Whip lore is too powerful. Pali may have no problems dealing with it, however I have used that lore to the defeat of many powerful foes. I just think it gives an incredibly powerful class much more power while they are wielding the most offensive weapon in the game. I don't know what I would suggest to weaken it though.

Perhaps just give the other bonuses so that they are not worthless by comparison and that will make whip lore selected less. I think Whip lore gives an unfair advantage against caster types that rely on hit and run and monks.

I've said for awhile. Combine shield bash and shield expertise. Make shield bash automatic. Maybe even give high dex races a large bonus with shield expertise. It is now useful, hell, I would love to roll a halfling warrior shield master. One of my favorite warriors was a halfling. They're just good RP.

Warriors have a 0 exp pen. Though so do a lot of other classes. What do they have in common? Typically EQ dependence and they don't come with a lot of perks and bonuses. Warriors NEED good eq to beat a lot of combos out there, especially since these days players have gotten too smart to let prot shield drop around a bashing foe.

I think bards are very viable in PK. Don't like the songs? Don't rehearse them. I do, however, want birth of the phoenix back.

My major issue with whip lore is that there is nearly always no reason to choose another lore as it is generally so far superior. Flail is quite good, too, and spear/staff has its benefits at times. But I just feel that half to three-quarters of the warrior lores are just redundant.

I think that all the warrior lores should have a definitive use, and be very good at that particular thing, seeing as how it's a rank 50 power.

I agree that bards are very PK viable, especially in certain cabals. I also have a soft spot for some of the old songs, particularly the "Devil's Dance" (that was really cool), and the one that let you summon hoards of tiny spiders. I had a bard sing "Devil's Dance" on me way back in the day, and it basically looked like:

dirt bard

No way, you decide to dance instead!

You dance wildly.

You dance wildly.

You dance wildly.

bash bard

No way, you decide to dance instead!

Fun times.

Yehh!!! Old school bard songs were funs.

Perhaps they should be made selectable.

That would bring a lot of replayability into bards.

Some would chose the RP songs. Some would chose the wacky songs.

Yes, blademasters. Talk about serious PK power houses.

When mastered, and played by someone who knows the class they can be quite deadly. Specially magic resistant races like Halflings, like Merle the Warmaster.

That was a pain to fight. Couldn't cast anything on her, and once she went low she would just vigil and counter, flee.

Then she could strike my dam eyes, or my heart.

Good thing the heart thing was toned down.

My bard remake is in progress slowly.

While I too loved a lot of the old bard songs, the spider one was overpowered.

Devils dance would also be overpowered in the current bard skillset.

Lust Seduction Desire(or something) is also awesome, but easily taken advantage of (as it should have been before the changes).

Bring back Old School Bards!

My major issue with whip lore is that there is nearly always no reason to choose another lore as it is generally so far superior. Flail is quite good, too, and spear/staff has its benefits at times. But I just feel that half to three-quarters of the warrior lores are just redundant.

NEWS FLASH!

I think we are missing a VERY important issue here.

WEAPONS

When I made my whip warrior, I didnt know what people were making because I just came back from a break... But I can tell you now that the NUMBER ONE reason I made that warrior was because of the WEAPONS available.

Kelp whip, manticore tails, Discordant Fiber - SORTED.

In comparison what good swords are around? Close to none. Vorpal that is never about... Clockrod - not good for non giants?

Good spears? Monorod (hard to get), Lance of Imbalance (real hard to get)

The list goes on and on.

Flails have some damn good choices too if you stick with it and make the effort into gasteride, blood or get hold of elundaris or the segmented stakes.

Other good weapons are hard to come by. And weapons are everything.

Even polearms... There are THREE what I consider upper end polearms. Hells fury, voluge and steelfeather.

pretty hard to go get them.

**So its not just the power of the lores, its the power of the weapons that would also make you choose those lores. **

I find that using a polearm vs anything except a ranger, and battlemage is a moot point. Vs nearly anything else you CAN and will do better dual wielding.

NEWS FLASH!

Other good weapons are hard to come by. And weapons are everything.

**So its not just the power of the lores, its the power of the weapons that would also make you choose those lores. **

Please define the stats on what you consider a 'powerful' weapon.

Quite possiblely I've been sucking with melee's because I set my expectations too low on what I want to use....

For me: Avg 24 damage or better. Avg 31 and 28 do exist but they are extememly good weapons.

Some weapons should also NEVER have high ratings eg staff. That's why the best staves aren't rated at avg 31 and certain other things can.

Off the top of my head (and I don't know 80% of eq out of some new areas)- good weapons:

Swords - 4

Dagger - 5 (possible a few I haven't thought of)

Spear - 5

Mace - 4

Flail - 6

Whip - 4 - 6

Polearm - 7

Axe - 3 or 4

Staff - 4 (not counting 'pincher staff' - unsure if it even exisits or I'm dreaming...)

Exotic - LOTS

Add +1 to all for that weapon that can be all types.

Not all of these are for everyone. Not all of these are super weapons. I think that you'd get by and then some with any of these though.

People like whip lore because it gives advantages to offense. Other lores advantages are more subtle.

L-A

Please define the stats on what you consider a 'powerful' weapon.

Quite possiblely I've been sucking with melee's because I set my expectations too low on what I want to use....

For me: Avg 24 damage or better. Avg 31 and 28 do exist but they are extememly good weapons.

Some weapons should also NEVER have high ratings eg staff. That's why the best staves aren't rated at avg 31 and certain other things can.

Off the top of my head (and I don't know 80% of eq out of some new areas)- good weapons:

Swords - 4

Dagger - 5 (possible a few I haven't thought of)

Spear - 5

Mace - 4

Flail - 6

Whip - 4 - 6

Polearm - 7

Axe - 3 or 4

Staff - 4 (not counting 'pincher staff' - unsure if it even exisits or I'm dreaming...)

Exotic - LOTS

Add +1 to all for that weapon that can be all types.

Not all of these are for everyone. Not all of these are super weapons. I think that you'd get by and then some with any of these though.

People like whip lore because it gives advantages to offense. Other lores advantages are more subtle.

L-A

Sadly, this day an age if you dont have the best, you cant compete with the best.

I suggested weapons that 'most' classes could use, obviously I didnt list soulblight, mournblade/stormbringer or elven flame one because they were too align orientated (just making a clarification.)

I consider a good weapon anything with 27av and higher, DEPENDING ON WHAT ELSE IT DOES.

If its 27av, i look for a weapon that adds hit and dam, or is at least burnproof/socketable.

I dont want to be funny, but if you hit fifty you ARE going to fight mephisoleer and imseik.

With dual level 10's with a HUGE avdamage not to mention a nice little list of other affects... You need the best to cope.. That simple.

Sadly, this day an age if you dont have the best, you cant compete with the best.

I suggested weapons that 'most' classes could use, obviously I didnt list soulblight, mournblade/stormbringer or elven flame one because they were too align orientated (just making a clarification.)

I consider a good weapon anything with 27av and higher, DEPENDING ON WHAT ELSE IT DOES.

If its 27av, i look for a weapon that adds hit and dam, or is at least burnproof/socketable.

I dont want to be funny, but if you hit fifty you ARE going to fight mephisoleer and imseik.

With dual level 10's with a HUGE avdamage not to mention a nice little list of other affects... You need the best to cope.. That simple.

I dare say differently.

I dare say differently.

But you play a vamp In my experience it's a HUGE difference between an avg 25 and an avg 30 weapon. Not to mention that many avg 30 are both cursed and burnproof!

cough Opinions cough

Sadly, this day an age if you dont have the best, you cant compete with the best.

If its 27av, i look for a weapon that adds hit and dam, or is at least burnproof/socketable.

Sorry, but I'm going to call you on that one. Avg 27+ and other effects? Those are elite weapons and if you're going to run away until you have them you're going to be running a long time.

So what will you do until you can round up an 'elite' weapon?

What would Muhammad Ali do?

What would Bruce Lee do?

What would Pikachu (WTF??) do?

FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT.

I hate to say it - but its attitudes like this that are impacting on the MUD. You do NOT need to have super eq - you need good eq with a few extra peices that you can shark here and there and the the BALLS to stand up and stick it to however comes calling. Yes, you die - perhaps a bit more than you like at first - but seriously, it can be done.

L-A

PS - vamps can be a subject for another time but I'll leave you with this: Who are considered our strongest PK'rs and were they strongest on vamps?

Who are considered our strongest PK'rs and were they strongest on vamps?

Some of our strongest PKers (mindflayer) have never played vamps. Others, such as Despiser and Totenkopf himself are quite strong when they play vamps. Dunno who played Messa but that is also a point.

Some of our strongest PKers (mindflayer) have never played vamps. Others' date=' such as Despiser and Totenkopf himself are quite strong when they play vamps. Dunno who played Messa but that is also a point.[/quote']

I played Messa, Askarran, Kyatha, Purikant and a couple others. I still think vamps are not necessarily the strongest choice, they have quite a few disadvantages people can use to their advantage. In the end it comes down to rp fun. If a char bores you, he can be powerful but still not fun to play. Of those guys above Askarran was probably my favorite though he hardly killed anyone (perhaps 20-30ish kills total compared to Messa who topped 500 kills), it is not all about racking up pks. Messa was fun to play too but the "You only got me because you are a vamp and they are overpowered" got old fast. I tell all those people to actually pull off a successful, longliving vamp. It is not that easy at all.

As to weapons, there are a couple quite good ones of most every kind, it's just that they usually are not that easy to get (remote places). Then there are also a couple cabal weapons that aren't bad at all.

I'm with L-A and Totenkopf. Sure, the super-decked are an uphill battle when you're not also super-decked... but they're far from unbeatable.