A possible solution to the multi-class 'problem'

[kengar]

Ok.. how about this as an idea...

Make Adv exp the same as crafting exp. In other words, you only gain exp from something YOU actually do. Leeching would be impossible. Even in a group, if you can't damage the mob you get no exp.

I like the idea in theory, but it gets complicated fast. That's fine for the damage dealers, but what about healers, debuffers, and crowd control specialists? You have to offer XP for these as well, but at that point, calculations get tricky. How important was keeping Mob X mezzed so that the group could take out Mob Y first?

Or, say the mezzers do such a good job that noone gets hurt. Should the healers not get any XP? The idea of someone in my group being adversely affected because I did my job well bothers me.

Or what about the tank who's main purpose is to pull the mobs and soak up damage so that everyone else can deal damage?

Actually, I'm not opposed to giving lesser amounts of XP for attempts to do damage. I've kicked people out of groups for leeching, but not if they were making an attempt to participate, no matter how ineffectual. Well, I take that back, if they participate by doing stupid things (pulling when we're already at capacity, breaking mezzes, etc) then we'll talk.

Along with this idea, you would need to make the exp gained from hunting lower level creatures trail off to zero, just like in crafting. This would also make it where there would be few players that had 4-15 level 100 adventure classes. Players would have to choose carefully what classes are chosen.

Agreed here. Pre-merge, they toned down the XP for mobs under your rating, and had to undo that change because there was little content over lvl 60. Well, there's mobs to twice that now, I think it's time they bring that change back. At rating 130, lvl 95, I stopped getting XP for lvl 60 mobs. That is WAY too forgiving, especially when I didn't even need my 5-minute specials to pull the entire spawn.

[refuse]

Problem is healers and such.

Do you do XP by "how much they do?" or that they do it?

How do you rate a person who is healing? Does buffing count (there are buffs teched with cleanse), how do you divide the XP? As a 60th level Healer I can rez people, does that count for XP?

What about stuns? Roots? Mezzes? Debuffs? Things that don't "Damage" a mob?

Then there is perfect spell. Lets you hit just about anything. So if a mage gets to level 10, the new PLing will be perfect spell, hit and get XP. Slows them down to the speed of perfect spell.

The problem with "doing it like crafting" is there are alot of ways to "do it". Heal, stun, rez, root, pull, mass drain, attack, and more. What is required to get XP? How much XP for each effect?

Without changing the system to be a skill based system, i.e. you get skill in what you "do", the "you have to do something" could break down.

Sure it will stop AFK people. But what else would it break?

A level 1 cleric can always heal (not for alot). What if a fighter gets lucky and doesn't need any healing for awhile, do the clerics/healers get nothing? Are they required to fight, then they need better armor/attacks.

Also going to your "everyone" is useful point earlier, a healer with 7pts per level on attack, at 100 level would only be equivalent to a 70th level fighter, no way they are going to damage a 100 level mob with an attack. Even if they are 8pts per level, they are equivalent to an 80 level mob, and at a serious handicap in "damaging".

The "rules" for such a system woudl be complex, and possibly broken. Heal even if the warrior isn't wounded so you get XP! What happens if they then get wounded and your heals are down? How much do you have to heal? What about buffs/cleanse does that count?


No reason for being defensive, the creation of a fair game is tough. And with the system inplace, changing it is tougher. We can only voice our displeasure/desire to have something different.


I for one think they should add "non-masterable" basic requirements to the classes (the things people need to survive) to encourage single classing. Add new class limited spells, new class limited armor/abilities. Add new "better" items that restrict the use of non-class style abilities.

Heavy armor for fighters that limits spell craft (even ad +10% to spell delays would discourage spell casting, but the armor would be useful) and limits evasion.

Lighter armors that don't have the penalties, but add something to the fighter (so they are lighter armored but can cast spells)

Robes only useable by mages (same armor as cloth, better use of abilities) only useable by mages.

Staves only useable by mages, armor sets by paladins, totems useable by shamans, tools for blood mages. . .

Once per tier abilities (only pick one per tier, but they are mage/bloodmage/warrior/monk) abilities, make them about equal, but T2 is better then T1 and you need the T1 ability for T2, players can choose 5 T1s, or 1 T5 or combonations. So a mage ability that has to have the person be a mage, and of the correct level, that is only useable in mage, that is useful. Same fore fighters/monks/shaman/druids.

Have special items (totems for shamans, hats for mages. . . ) that add to the "primary" stats (fire/ice/nature/shaman) of the class, but lower the other non-primary abilities (so a shaman totem adds +X to nature +X to blight, -X to spirit, ice fire. . . . ) kind of like the blighted equipment, but intended.

Have sets of "good items" for the classes that combined they shut off other classes, but provide uniqueness to the character class. Have these questable. Same for dragons (armor of the lunus. . . ) So a set of paladin armor. Have 2-3 sets per classs (one for fighting (heavier armor), one for adventuring (good armor, extra life. . )) Make them make sense for the class.

Things like that. Let the current MC's keep their abilities, but add items to make new players see a benefit for staying single class. And reward the single class people with new abilities, balances to their classes, filling in the "required" abilities/spells.

Add to the game with content, then after that has been around awhile, then re-evaluate the situation, see if changes are still needed.


Make new "theoretical" classes. Dark Cleric, Ice Shaman, Fire Druid. These can be done through the suits/quests. So Dark Cleric would be healer/blood mage. The suit gives some balance without making a new class. Fire Druids (fire cleanse and is a form of natural rebirth) that quest for the suit of Fire Druid.


Edit Kengar said much the same as my initial portion.

[imported_tjl]

"can't see anything in there that would lead one to believe this game is all about multiclassing."

i didn't say this game is all about multiclassing uh...we are talking about the adv aspect here.

here is what you said, verbatim:
"because some people chose to to stay singleclass in a primarily multiclassing game?"

the adventuringside of the game is primarily about multiclassing and it was well promoted as such, as well it shouldn't be newsflash to anyone.

I don't think it is "well promoted" at all. Other than the fact that it can be done, I can find no other evidence to support your opinion. multiclassing is just another option in adventuring, its by no means the primary focus.

why pick HZ to play then complain about MC, which something unique that's been good for many who embraced it?

people complain about MC for many reasons. I agree it is unique and good for those who embrace it, to an extent. I am starting some multiclassing because I am sick of missing mobs with my crappy focus. 300-400 adv levels in one character isn't going too far. It's when it gets overembraced (toons that are basically a whole group rolled into one) that most people object to it. why? because it is leading to crappier and crappier mob designs (all stun, all have high hp, super evasive, all DoT, most mez, multistrikes... ), devalues the purists (don't see many clerics/healers/mage types anymore, since most can use thier spells/abilites outside of that class just as well, if not better)

in the end it's simply about people who rather see changes tofit their staystyle and prefence, and care for none else.

not really, single classes actually have a style other than "pull anything and everything in sight and kill it with little risk" especially since a large majority have done very little to earn their levels.

[Pharcellus]

"can't see anything in there that would lead one to believe this game is all about multiclassing."

i didn't say this game is all about multiclassing uh...we are talking about the adv aspect here.

No, you said, as he quoted, "in a primarily multiclassing game". There is no evidence to support that Horizons was ever billed as a "primarily multiclassing game". That said, it DOES have a lot to do with the game, and a lot of people do it, because it is supported without strict limitations. However, it was never emphasized, like with a bullet point on the box, or a section in the manual. Now the manual DOES explain how multiclassing works, but I don't find any overt emphasis on enticing players to make a choice to buy the game simply because of it (especially since you can't open the box and read the manual before you plunk down your dough at the cashier).

the adventuring side of the game is primarily about multiclassing and it was well promoted as such, as well it shouldn't be newsflash to anyone.

That's what he was asking. Where was it "well promoted as such"?

now think about it, if a person like to play the more pure, singleclassing game, why would they chose this one? quite a few use the basis of purity or playing to the role, that promotes grouping and the need to fill such role but, aren't there a bunch of games out there that's 100 times better in that regard? why in the world would they pick HZ to play?

Because there is no indication that they CAN'T play the "more pure, singleclassing game" and have a reasonable expectation to be competent in the world? Hell, the box and the manual talk more about grouping and "forming online alliances and friendships" more than multiclassing. Only after playing for a while does the issue become apparent.

for many others, it's because they like to multiclass but their race/class can't mutliclass, or that they don't care for multiclassing but simply want to be just as good. in the end it's simply about people who rather see changes to fit their staystyle and prefence, and care for none else.

..and multiclassing proponents don't fit into that category? Sounds kinda hypocritical to me... *shrug*.

As I have said before, I look at it from several points-of-view:

1) As a Dragon, who is denied the opportunity.
2) As a singleclasser, who wants to be rewarded for focus and dedication.
3) As a multiclasser, who wants to maintain some semblance of general class identity from an RP aspect.
4) As a game operator/developer, who realizes that it is a Pandora's Box, opened wide.

I admit that, for some, it has been the only thing keeping their subscriptions active. However, the question remains, in my mind, whether there will be a long-term benefit from the "feature", and whether it will be manageable another year or two down the road, as the problems inherent in the design will only magnify over time without intervention.

[AA0]

I think the last few posts are 100% correct, there is no way to fairly, and properly award exp for the actions of a person without choking the server in combat analysis.

I am still convinced the only and best way is to replan out our current classes so they are useful, fun, and proper.

[Pharcellus]

Make Adv exp the same as crafting exp. In other words, you only gain exp from something YOU actually do. Leeching would be impossible. Even in a group, if you can't damage the mob you get no exp.

Then you won't ever have any decent Healers around.

Something that one of my old gaming buds used to do in his TTRPG was to reward the healers for actually healing/cleansing/raising someone. Basically, for playing their "role" in the party. Sometimes it was given out as a single combat bonus; sometimes, it was given out as an episode bonus.

Of course, this all gets back to the various suggestions about seriously to radically changing the character creation and advancement system. The penultimate is that you have a completely skill-based system where your skills advance primarily through use. You swing your sword, you get credit towards advancement based on how much you damage the enemy, and how challenging the enemy itself is, applied to your sword-swinging skill. Same goes with healing-spell casting; same goes with brick-making, tool-making, whatever. I am not saying that Horizons has to go to this kind of system as its only hope, as there are other ideas that have been suggested that are comparable in the significance of the required changes. It's just an example.

The problem is, like I said above, Pandora's Box is open. The effects of the problems are widespread and no band-aid solution is going to fix them significantly enough to matter in the long term. Few are going to be happy with sweeping changes, but since few are playing the game anyway (and too few to keep it afloat), they probably should consider some sweeping, radical changes that address the problems the best they can. They aren't going to make everyone happy anyway; I suggest they not worry about popularity, and do what is necessary for their survival into the future.

[refuse]

As I have said before, I look at it from several points-of-view:

1) As a Dragon, who is denied the opportunity.
2) As a singleclasser, who wants to be rewarded for focus and dedication.
3) As a multiclasser, who wants to maintain some semblance of general class identity from an RP aspect.
4) As a game operator/developer, who realizes that it is a Pandora's Box, opened wide.

I admit that, for some, it has been the only thing keeping their subscriptions active. However, the question remains, in my mind, whether there will be a long-term benefit from the "feature", and whether it will be manageable another year or two down the road, as the problems inherent in the design will only magnify over time without intervention.

That is why I say add to the game now.

Add "unique features" to each class, add abilities that cover the needed features (Dragons too). Then add in special once in a character quests that add to a class, so you can multi-class but only get the bonus once per character. Encourage single class play if that is what is needed. Add content to classes to make them last longer (not slow them down, content). Add quests for "class" specific items (again content), and ROP/AROP style advancement of classes (only once per character, with stats gain on par with RoP/ARoP).

So characters specialize because of Content, not because of "limitations". Let the choice to specialize/multi-class mean something. Make the choice part of the content.

It would be great to see Palies running around in paladin armor, Mages in robes, blood mages in blood, dragon lunus being "dragon lunus". Let the specialization happent through quests, and as a reward for following a tighter path.

[Senkeleron Fell]

One thing that is probably important once they open the game up past 100 - No new masterable abilities. One problem now is that there are far to many abilities that work in classes where they just shouldn't.

Make some good new high level abilities, but make them unique to the class.

[Kwinn]

*snip*

As for multi-classing, as long as I don't have to compete with Uber-Peds for quest kills then I really couldn't care any less. *snip*

I guess you want us 'uber-peds' to just stand aside and let Your Royal Scaliness and all those hunt them? Perhaps you would like a private hunting reserve?

Dream on Sport. If I see a named I am killing it. If there is a dragon in the neighborhood, oh well sucks being that dragon. If said dragon shoots me a tell and sez he hunting for ARoP will leave it be and even inform him if I see it. Otherwise, dead named.

Dont like it? Tough, I dont care...


Kwinn

[Crazyfingers]

I agree Refuse

Do a /who and click bloodmage. Then Berzerker, paladin, monk, heck click on all of them except healer/cleric. Then /who cleric. There are as many clerics as all the other schools combined. Does this mean everyone loves to play a healer type? Hell no, clerics get the best armor and can use all the magic lines. TANK Are Elars, Bloodmages, zerkers, etc fun to play? I think so, but if your an adventure type your main goal is to kill things the most effecient way with the most armor and attacks.

I personally think its to late to change the system and its better to add to it.
Make crystals, armor and weapon forms, and queststhat are class specific. As another poster said, he wouldnt have leveled healer if he had enough focus as mage. Make a mage crystal with +100 focus and +100 power. I wouldnt have leveled guardian if i didnt need the armor use as Bloodmage. Bloodmage crystal of +100 armor +100 spirit. Really sweet crystals that are only useable by certain classes. So if a tank wants to play as a cleric he is left with a +100 life magic +100 one hand crush crystal. Would be great for a true healer but a tank would at least have thoughts of pursuing a different class.

But thats only half the problem. There has to be a reason to play your main class. Dungeon crawls(Western Deadlands, Crimson Scourge, Eastern Deadlands, Satyr Islands), treasure hunting, fighting the WA outta towns. Specific areas and mobs for different things. Not any mob over 80 drops the same items. Its just dumb. Does anyone fight in the Crimson Scourge? Why is that? If this part of the game isnt worked on, there isnt anything else for an adventurer to do except level another class. Even if you like the game, like the community enjoy playing an archer, monk, dragon. At some point you feel like achieving something. So you level another class for that feeling of achievement. I stayed bloodmage for close to 300 million xp over 100. I took up couple more classes outta pure boredom.
And I know i'm not the only adventurer that does this. BTW like someone else said after 4 or 5 classes your build is finished. The other classes just make your adventure level go up. Maybe for fame or maybe outta boredom.

NimKhazad

[Leviathan]

I will have to agree with Vahrokh wholeheartedly on this one. Dragons for the most part will no longer be shunned from groups, or viewed as a drain upon them. They can actually be useful as an excellent tank.

When playing my biped on Elnath, I felt sorry for the dragons who would show up and want to join the groups there. Nobody wanted them. But I understood that there were "real live people" behind those dragons that just wanted to join others, play a game and have fun. But I saw them shunned like lepers. Like the kid that no one wanted to play with. It was sad and wrong. I hated to watch that. It's a wonder they all didn't quit.

This "fix" to the dragons was a long time coming, and was overdue in my opinion.
That said, I do not believe any Multiclass nerfing is needed. Philip is right, I cannot take on more than 2 Elite Blights at a time without a resonable chance of surviving it. Yes, there are mobs that are easy pickings. Melee mobs have always been much easier, but if people find enjoyment in that, so be it. It's a game, it's about having fun.

The whole multiclassing issue, was about the huge disparity between bipeds and dragons. That gap has been narrowed a great deal. In fact, dragons have a huge advantage against single mobs now, which was their original design intent. But they can now take the punishment of the mobs, while taking them out one at a time (very quickly I might add).

With the impending Ancient Status, dragons can only get better. Yes, bipeds can do alot of things better than dragons, but dragons can for the first time, do some things better than bipeds. To make a long story short (too late :P ) I feel that multiclassing in its present form is just fine.

[Phillip]

why thank you Levi.

after reading alotof crap about how this multiclassing wasn't promoted and prove that itwas ectc...personally, i'm tire of the anti-MC bs. i only followed the game for 6 years before playing the shiete...but yeah, MC wasn't something promote hahaha m'kay.

here's one brilliant quote that sums up what the anti-MCs got on their mind:

"not really, single classes actually have a style other than "pull anything and everything in sight and kill it with little risk" especially since a large majority have done very little to earn their levels."




yeah, cuz these anti-MCs just know that for a fact, huh?

i like to see a rating200+ biped pull say,6 Elites. and live.

nah, try 6 Vets. Elites are just cruel.

and yeah, the single class that actually have a style will die too.

this is pathetic.

hahaha Kwinn look what you started....[:|]

[imported_Ssilmath]

Piggybacking a bit off of phillip here...

When was the last time you saw any 'uberped' pull a large group of tier V WA? And I mean, the actual ones, not bugs. When was the last time you saw anyone grab 3 vexators and nuke them? Or even mithril golems? The most powerful people can't take more than a couple three at a time, due to things like Avalanche of Ore. If these everknowlegable singleclassed people would start actually watching, you'd find multiclassers like myself who can take down a Tavertine golem solo, but not a group of more then 4 Jade Golems. Multiclassing, in the end, will do nothing more than enhance my main class, a paladin. I'll be equivalent to perhaps a level 110 or 120 paladin once I am done, for having worked for over 500 adventure levels. And there will still be single classed people who will outdamage, outheal and possibly outfight me. <Shrugs> But of course, in all of my time playing and observing, I have to be wrong, because there are so many dragons out there due to the difficulty of playing one...

[AA0]

Just so you know, from IRC we've been given hints that yet another set of nerfs is coming. TG will not stop the pattern of nerfing and over buffing mobs, making the situation worse and worse.
Blights/fyakki are getting a boost, along with a few other of the "easy" mobs.
If this keeps going on, people are just going to leave. Something needs to be done about them, but this artificial raising of stats to combat high rating characters is just wrong.

[evilkarl]

Some mobs need buffing. Primarily to their AI so that they function better in general but more specifically with the live stock so that when there are more than one attacking an individual they gain benefits and make farming more difficult.

Any details of the "nerf" on IRC?

[Kulamata]

I'm afraid I could not agree more. AAO. Nerfing to retain and attract players has simply not worked, andmore will not work better. The same effort that would nerf could add content instead. That is working. According to one of the devs, subs are up (an undisclosed amount of course, but up). I think that this is directly the result of a recent policy shift, with content being added, minor irritants being fixed, and NO nerfs for some time.

It's difficult to believe that a return to a policy that showed only relentless failure is likely. I certainly hope that it does not happen.

[Hal`cyon Sskyler]

I'm afraid I could not agree more. AAO. Nerfing to retain and attract players has simply not worked, andmore will not work better.

I couldn't disagree more. One of the leading factors of boredom and eventual leaving the game is the repetitive killing of the 'easiest' monster. A perfectly balanced game should not favor hunting of one type of enemy over another, a player should be able to fight any monster of the same rating and not see a major difference in combat, save for special situations where the player has a school-given talent that makes one monster type favorable. Fyakki and spiders are just easy, too easy. Since XP is just a matter of rating comparison and in no means a measurement of difficulty in defeating a monster, allowing such enemies to exist in their weakened state is a detriment to the game and a less obvious factor in increasing boredom, repetition, and the feeling that leveling is just a treadmill.

You cannot please everyone, only the majority, and sometimes you have to break a few eggs to make a dragon, blah, blah, etc. Ignoring issues isn't a nice and friendly way to solve all problems that arise in a MMO game. Part of managing the game isn't just adding new content, it's making sure everything already existing remains fair and balanced to those that play.

[evilkarl]

A no "nerf" policy is worse than a "nerf" when required policy. the word "nerf" gets thrown around far too much.

The game needs change not all changes will be seen as being for the better by everyone. Some abilities should be made unmasterable those that have taken classes would be most displeased should some of those abilities become unmasterable. Natures path being made unmasterable would be appreciated by rangers but not by others, and would be a positive step towards class definition.

Living in fear of people leaving all the time could be equally detrimental as nerfing.

[imported_tjl]

why thank you Levi.

after reading alotof crap about how this multiclassing wasn't promoted and prove that itwas ectc...personally, i'm tire of the anti-MC bs. i only followed the game for 6 years before playing the shiete...but yeah, MC wasn't something promote hahaha m'kay.

ok so in those 6 years im sure you came across something that can prove your statement. still awaiting it... you threw that out as fact so let's see the proof.

I don't think anyone here is anti-MCing. (as in it shouldn't exist at all) Everyone here agrees that it is good to have, but not in its current state. not sure what thread your reading. You know it is possible to be pro something, and still have some complaints or critisisms about it.[:O]

here's one brilliant quote that sums up what the anti-MCs got on their mind:

"not really, single classes actually have a style other than "pull anything and everything in sight and kill it with little risk" especially since a large majority have done very little to earn their levels."

yeah, cuz these anti-MCs just know that for a fact, huh?

and yes, that is fact. a large number of super MCers just stood around and got mega xp on elnath and crimson scourge. go there, you can still see it happening now.

i like to see a rating200+ biped pull say,6 Elites. and live.

nah, try 6 Vets. Elites are just cruel.

I have seen both happen, from ratings way below 200 too. it is a lot harder, but it is totally possible with the right combo of classes. but almost no super MCers do it because is an actual challenge, and they don't get as much xp/loot/etc as they would from killing 30 spiders.

[Theolaerynn]

[img]/Web/Themes/default/images/icon-quote.gif[/img]Theolaerynn wrote: *snip*

As for multi-classing, as long as I don't have to compete with Uber-Peds for quest kills then I really couldn't care any less. *snip*

I guess you want us 'uber-peds' to just stand aside and let Your Royal Scaliness and all those hunt them? Perhaps you would like a private hunting reserve?

Dream on Sport. If I see a named I am killing it. If there is a dragon in the neighborhood, oh well sucks being that dragon. If said dragon shoots me a tell and sez he hunting for ARoP will leave it be and even inform him if I see it. Otherwise, dead named.

Dont like it? Tough, I dont care...

Well, it is pretty clear by your reply that you are an ******, but let me clarify before you get your panties even more in a bunch:

I was not saying I wanted exclusive and total access, but I do not think it the least bit unreasonable to ask for one kill to advance a quest.