[Next Message in Time] | [Previous Message in Time] | [Next Message in Topic] | [Previous Message in Topic]

Message ID: 24157
Date: Thu Mar 1 18:25:28 GMT 2001
Author: Jeffrey Sue
Subject: Re: [eqbards] Re: Whats the arguement?


At 01:03 AM 3/1/01 +0000, you wrote:
>Heh, hasn't this thread been Kabong'ed?
>
>In any case, had to chime in here. JS, your point about being
>overpowered and underpowered in different aspects of the game is well
>taken. However, this is the difficulty in determining what "balance"
>really means. The weights you place on the various aspects in
>forming an overall balance picture are no more and no less completely
>arbitrary than anyone elses. Everyone has their favorite aspect they
>want to be good at, and if bards aren't meeting the grade in that
>particular aspect, at that particular time, then people get upset and
>think they're underpowered. It's as simple as that. Stating that
>bards are overpowered "in general" assumes that you have the perfect
>set of weights to apply to each aspect that a bard is either good, or
>not good at to arrive at an overall value. This basically boils down
>to opinion, and your opinion seems to be in the minority amongst most
>bards.

sure, i agree that this is my opinion. what i am doing is explaining why
it is my opinion with concrete reasons, whereas a lot of people on the other
side just parrot that we are underpowered, we need this, we need that, and
never put forth a coherent reason as to why. only the verant designers know
what weights they want to put on various phases and methods of playing the
game when they are deciding class balance.

>For each individual player, it comes to finding out what aspects of
>the game bards are good at, and what they are not good at, and
>applying that to their respective playing styles. If they like the
>fit, then they happily keep playing their bards. If they don't, they
>either play a different class, or the complain a lot, and keep
>playing their bard. Given the relatively small number of bards, and
>the number of bards stop playing at a given level. Apparently many
>bards do not find a good fit. I'm not saying this to imply a
>definite conclusion, but the data is relevant. Personally, I enjoy
>playing my bard very much, but do get frustrated in many situations.
>Especially in my current regular adventuring group, which has
>warrior, cleric, enchanter, shaman, me, druid. It is VERY difficult
>for me to justify my participation in the group. Especially in
>places like Howling Stones, where the group would do MUCH better
>replacing me with a rogue. But these are my friends, and they enjoy
>my company, and I theirs. So I play mana song, and self buffs, and
>hope I never have to use my CC, because that means that we're all
>likely going to die. I'm not 53 yet, but in a few weeks when I am, I
>suspect I'll feel a little more useful again.

well ok, as to the first part, the data may be relevant but it may not be relevant
to a discussion on whether bards are balanced or not with respect to the other
classes. we kinda went through this on another thread, where there are quite a
few other reasons why someone would not want to play a bard which have nothing
to do with a bard's relative power to other classes.

as to your effectiveness in your group here is one suggestion. how often
do you get a 2 or 3 pull rather than a single pull? this seems like the perfect
situation to talk with your friend the enchanter and set up a plan where you charm
one of the extras and use it to help fight. if you twist hymn and nivs along with
charm you will hardly need any healing. and i'm not positive, but i'm pretty sure
a level 46-50ish kunark mob will still outdamage a level 50-52ish rogue. also since
mana isn't too much of a problem, perhaps you would make a good puller, using
lament song to pull one or two, and chains or charm to bring them back without
you taking a lot of damage on the way back.

>In any case, my point is, that the quantification of the power of a
>class is very difficult. And I feel it is quite bold of you to state
>that we are overpowered. Unfortunately for us, Verant seems to put
>the weights in the same places you do. :)

well, my personal relative weights are more weight to grouping over soloing and much
more weight to everyday experience hunting than ubermob raids. this is mostly based
not on my personal method of gaming, but on what the majority of the players in everquest
are doing on a daily basis (well, to be more accurate, i should say my perception of what
the majority...) along with Verant's stated goal of making this a grouping game.