If you deviate from the set I posted then we will be in the position of one circle has TWO OP skills/skillsets that synergize too well over the circles that can't capitalize. The set I have posted makes sense thematically, takes into consideration ranged, mana, knight and buff balance and lessens the balancing headache load that will have to be made during the change and following it.
So. Here's a major problem with Imperian rightnow as far as newbie retention.
Predator is a garbage tier trap class. It is so utterly unworkable in PvP that Septus and I have been completely unable to make it work with L2/3 sitara and +3 strength and artifact dartsheaths. After a lot of thought and work, my group combat plan for predator is "change stance vae-sant" into "quickdraw claymore|slash target". Yes, my combat plan is the Inept 50% stance skill and trans weaponry. This class is completely and totally awful in PvP with no realistic progression path at all.
It is an absolute newbie trap and I see tons of newbies go "Oh, your advice for predator PvP is 'it doesn't exist, we cannot make it work even with thousands of dollars worth of artifacts, go outrider while you still have 90% lesson regain'? That's pretty depressing" and then they're never seen again.
At the very least you should remove predator as an option from the newbie introduction or make a note like "HEY THIS CLASS IS COMPLETE TRASH IN PVP AND IT IS LITERALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO KILL WITH. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED. ARE YOU SURE YOU WANT TO PLAY THIS CLASS? [Y/N]"
Honestly, this class should be revamped before monk. It should have been revamped before Diabolist and before Berserker. It is a giant gaping wound that bleeds newbies and it has been one for years and it should be an absolute immediate priority.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
Honestly, this class should be revamped before monk. It should have been revamped before Diabolist and before Berserker. It is a giant gaping wound that bleeds newbies and it has been one for years and it should be an absolute immediate priority.
I feel like Monk needs to be revamped before there's enough room in the Predator space to make it a dangerous limb break class without the risk of BBT hanging over it's head. Predator is a lot like Deathknight before vivisect got removed, only they don't have the closer because monk does.
After some discussion on Bellatores, we came up with some thoughts on how to make classes neutral.
First, the classes that go neutral should be the weaker classes. I have been convinced of this. Less impact on balance, they'll get the extra attention they need, and the strongest classes are(for the most part) the most thematic classes.
Second, the release should go in waves. Say, release one class from each faction every month. This gives the game time to settle and it gives time to address issues.
Third, the stronger classes should stay faction bound, at least for now. This has the least impact on balance, and it avoids the issue where AM gets something awesome like mage and magick gets something like predator.
Fourth, don't release predator. It's bad enough that newbies from one faction get stuck in the trap. Don't let the entire game put their foot in it.
With that said, this is what I'd keep faction specific.
Demonic -->Summoner: Ranged. Very powerful. Very thematic. -->Deathknight: Very powerful, very thematic, knight class so every circle already has one. -->Diabolist: Lots of useful utility, good damage, super thematic. Maybe swap with defiler?
Magick: -->Druid: Ranged. Very powerful and thematic. -->Runeguard: Powerful, thematic, knight. -->Bard: Mage would be more thematic but Bard has bigger balance implications, with buffstacking and such. Could also see keeping Mage and releasing Bard. Bard is thematically weaker and mechancally stronger, Mage is the flip side. Could go either way.
AM: -->Priest: Thematic, decently powerful, absolve has huge synergy problems with other circles. -->Templar: Thematic, shares Devotion, knight. -->Outrider: Powerful, huge balance implications. Not as thematic but it's an allstar powerhouse class that would be a legit unfair trade if other circles got it. Also has some huge synergy potential with other professions. -->Monk: This is temporary. During the monk revamp monks would lose their ranged skills and priests would gain a ranged shieldbreaker, ranged strip, ranged damage, and ranged hinder. Then monk would go public. --Note: I would be willing to consider giving other circles outrider and just flat out keeping monk, maybe. My problem with it is that it's a hugely popular power class, and every other powerful profession trading sides is pretty skill-intensive and unpopular. It would be a huge power increase for demonic and magick while AM would be gaining classes that very few people actually can play properly. AM is on top right now so maybe it's a sacrifice that could be justified, but it strikes me as a bit inequitable that AM would be giving out its strongest and most popular profession in return for what's basically the stuff nobody else likes.
When you discount predator, that leaves each circle with 3 classes going public. I'd release them like this:
ranger/assassin/renegade: fairly unpopular professions, shouldn't skew things too badly. AM basically gets one profession and magick and demonic both get ranger due to assassin and renegade being basically identical. Maybe convert all renegades to assassins and give the new combined assassin class a CHOOSE SPEAR/CHOOSE TRIDENT type of thing?
hunter/defiler/berserker: Some powerful classes with good synergies.
mage/wytch/monk: this would be dependent on the monk revamp being done, but this would be the star professions being released. Most powerful, with the most balance implications.
predator: whenever you make it less garbage, really.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
Honestly, this class should be revamped before monk. It should have been revamped before Diabolist and before Berserker. It is a giant gaping wound that bleeds newbies and it has been one for years and it should be an absolute immediate priority.
I feel like Monk needs to be revamped before there's enough room in the Predator space to make it a dangerous limb break class without the risk of BBT hanging over it's head. Predator is a lot like Deathknight before vivisect got removed, only they don't have the closer because monk does.
You could probably revamp Predator alongside monk. With monk turning into a caster and losing their limb damage, predator would have a lot of space to expand. Could give them a back damage kill, maybe.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
Like Khizan said this was discussed in Bellatores and I mostly agree with what was posted here.
Some sidenotes:
Now that Bard sketches uses Magick professions, I would argue that Bard is just as thematically tied to Magick as Mage is or more. If Bard was released as neutral, they would either have to rely on finding Magickers to sit still and sketch them to use their Magick-themed sketches or we would have to make sketch skills and abilities for all professions.
Predator/Assassin/Renegade should be released all at the same time. Assassin and Renegade should be merged as professions and be given an option to either summon a lamia from the Demon Plane or the Phantom from the Elemental (cannot have both at the same time).
I agree that Predator should not be released until the class has been fixed so we should delay releasing neutral professions until we have finished the Monk revamp and had a revamp for Predator.
Holding off on neutral professions will allow us to give our full attention to the Monk Revamp, the ranged ability transfer from monk to priest and the revamp of Predator.
edit: Don't give predators a back damage kill, instead I think it would be more interesting if they could benefit from mechanics similar to fractures. Fractures are limb specific breaks that used health sips to cure. Uncured Fractures cause recurring afflictions.
I could see Predator as a class that either pressures health due to health sips being used to cure fractures or lead into ciriosis because fractures are not cured leading to affliction overload. Of course we do not have to take everything about fractures as it is, but I like the idea of heath sips being used to cure things thus forcing a choice between damage and afflictions.
I like predator! It has good flavour! Not everything has to be about PK all the time. If you insist on changing it please let it keep its good bashing (combo attacks I enjoy), because that is one of the reasons I picked it...
Note that fractures only work in Achaea because the class that uses them is very slow, high damage pressure. Predator doesn't really fit that build currently.
I agree with the rest of Khizan/Iluv's posts though. I think a mass release is risky-there'll almost certainly be some minor issues with each release, but a lot of minor issues add up quickly. One per circle per month just seems like it'd be way more painless.
Monk losing ranged in its revamp and priest picking it up seems like the most elegant solution, as that's the only reason holding monk back from neutrality. Then the end goal could be outrider/priest/templar for Am, which is both thematic (priest/templar antioch, outrider Ithaqua) and a pretty good mix of factional options. Currently you can't really make monk neutral if summoner/druid stay factionalised (which I think they should), which is a shame because monk really has no thematic value in terms of the Antimagick circle. Fortunately that's probably the one profession most well placed to change, given its pending revamp. Bonus: doing that is basically a new class, as releasing the monk revamp to everyone after its changes is pretty much that.
My list would probably be:
Month 1: assassin/renegade, ranger. You could do predator here but I share Khizan's concerns on that one: predator really is an unplayable profession in modern imperian, and will likely just make the newbie trap more of an issue if neutral until resolved.
Month 2: berserker, hunter, diabolist. Diab might be an unpopular opinion but I actually feel Defiler is a far more thematic profession for the Demonic circle, and you already get demonic summoning representation with summoner. Giving some Khandava representation in the class spread is good. This could definitely work with releasing defiler too though.
Then pending monk rework: Monk, predator, mage, wytch. I still think mage is a better pick for the magick circle thematically, but I definitely see where Iluv's coming from with some of his concerns. Mage is the safer option to release in terms of stability.
I could see Predator as a class that either pressures health due to health sips being used to cure fractures or lead into ciriosis because fractures are not cured leading to affliction overload. Of course we do not have to take everything about fractures as it is, but I like the idea of heath sips being used to cure things thus forcing a choice between damage and afflictions.
I think that back damage or the like would be better simply because it's easier to implement without a total revamp. The predator limb damage chassis isn't bad at all; the problem is fitting a finisher into it while accounting for monk synergy.
With monk gone I think you could patch a back damage kill into Predator without much problem at all. Maybe something about stabbing you in the spine? Spines seem like a predator thing.
Then they'd just need a decent way to account for parry since they lack cripple/strike/jpk. Maybe Predators could get a mode they activate where if a predator breaks one leg while the other leg is also damaged, they automatically kick your legs out from under you? This would let you feint into a break without having to bladesurge for feint/hit/hit/trip.
Then you just switch change the stance system up. Right now the stance system is crazy. I know, I know, I used to say it wasn't that bad, but that was rose-tinted classes and I was wrong. Because right now, it works like this: There are 5 stances. So for one combo I need to come up with 5 possible attack patterns that account for my current stance. And each stance also needs an attack pattern for rebounding being up. Then it needs a completely different one for shield being up, because some attacks go through rebounding but not shield and they can be useful for stance changing into raze. So that's 15 attack strings I need to come up with for one attack. Then you add bladesurge and now I need one version of every one of those attack strings that has been modified for bladesurge, so I went from 15 to 30. Then I need a couple of strings for shield and rebounding both. This adds up to something like 30+ possible states to track in every attack. It gets a bit insane.
So what I'd do there make every knifeplay ability work from every stance. Most of the important abilities can already be chained. Then I'd remove stance change from each ability, so that you always stayed in one stance, and make stances static bonuses. Just change Vae-Sant so that it only applies to Predation abilities.
I really think you could get predator workable pretty easily. This stuff would probably cover most of it. Sure, it would have some big issues with Beastmastery being clunky and unfun, but the profession would have a kill again, which is what it really needs.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
My take on it is that no matter how much balancing is done, combat is focused around the leaders. You can fix as many classes as you want, balance as many abilities as you can, improve the distribution as much as possible, but actual yield of your effort is going to be minuscule unless you can retain three or four capable combat leaders who have sufficient presence to command the twenty or so B-listers around.
This will not change simply because the vast majority of players will simply want to press a button and win. This has not changed in the last three years I've been around, nor has it probably changed since the opening of Imperian.
My personal gripe with having to lead combat lies around trying to account for one particular ability, namely, the Raksha band. We can balance as many classes as possible, create as many variables as possible, shift populations around as much as possible (if it were even possible), and in the hands of a capable combatant, this skill can dramatically shift battles. While this is a great thing in my opinion, for the vast majority of players in a small population base, fighting against a Raksha band is a losing proposition and can and has led to player loss. While the introduction of shackles and chains have ameliorated this combat advantage some what, the skill has repeatedly caused disgruntlement and frustration that I have personally witnessed across the rings I have been in.
In short, my position is thus: you can run as many balancing acts and classleads as you want, but until you provide a reasonable expectation while combating a Raksha band, most people will eventually forgo combat as an exercise in futility.
The other major combat decider that should have a discussion of its own is healing stacks; one that @Lionas had previously proposed a considered approach for but was relatively ignored.
So, balance all you want, divvy up the professions as much as you want, change finishers all you can, but managing outlier expectations should be a considered priority.
Can we have sanctioned raids? This is an Achaean system, and would probably need some tweaks to fit our game, but the great thing about them is that, if the city being raided is just plain sick of the raid, they really can shut it down (by leaving the city, and in particular, having citizens who are in their "army" leave the city). It's a clear message to raiders "we're done". In fact, they can similarly prevent a sanctioned raid from starting at all.
If the raiders win, they do a small amount of temporary cosmetic damage to the city.
I do think it would require city defenses that aren't quite so incredibly strong. I actually wonder if we might have the strongest city defenses of any game. Not sure, but I have a feeling we're near the top. Weaker defenses might also mean more chances to for people (who are not Septus) to go after bountied people, people holding monos, Champions.
Overhauling the towne system needs to be done anyways and it an be something unique to Imperian over Achaea and the rest of the IREs. Think of the possibilities. All townes become neutral and capture-able. The conflict system would be over capturing and protecting townes that you like. Once an org controls a towne, they can set how they treat it, i.e. enslave the population or offer them citizenship. Perhaps you can choose not to capture the towne you are attacking but raid it for loot.
I do think the townes could turn out great and also provide a great outlet.
I was thinking about what Zerin said today though. There is something about defending your home turf (or attacking an enemy's home turf). People hate it, but they also love it. And this system might make it bearable to do something that is always going to inherently have MUCH more emotional investment - not even just for the more RP centric player, but really, probably for just about any player.
If all your townes are raided, then towne denizens flock to the home Org where the players must defend against the final raid. If the final defense is lost then the war system declares a winner, an in-game war treaty contract is put in place which can be broken after a certain time frame.
There's an important distinction between the two types of raiding.
The traditional (camp their city, kill their guards, all that good stuff) is fun for the raiders. Its not fun for the defenders, because their only recourse is to suck it up until the raiders get bored.
The other type of raiding is where you give a definite win condition for defenders. This makes it (usually) fun for both sides, because the defenders can actually win in such a way that isn't "ok guys, I think they're bored now. Good job, see you tomorrow for round 476. Chin up, eventually they'll lose interest and move onto somebody else."
Raiders love the first type of raiding. Overall, its more fun for them. 99% of defenders hate it.
Both raiders and defenders will enjoy the second type (generally speaking, you can't please everyone). Clear winner, really.
Imo, you need some form of raiding system. Its too early for me to properly articulate why, but I think without one cities lose a lot of their intrinsic value to the game atmosphere. Defending something against a hostile force gives it psychological value. Cultivating that attachment changes cities from somewhere to hang out to somewhere to be invested in.
Overhauling the towne system needs to be done anyways and it an be something unique to Imperian over Achaea and the rest of the IREs. Think of the possibilities. All townes become neutral and capture-able. The conflict system would be over capturing and protecting townes that you like. Once an org controls a towne, they can set how they treat it, i.e. enslave the population or offer them citizenship. Perhaps you can choose not to capture the towne you are attacking but raid it for loot.
Okay, i've been in a game where the towne/villages are neutral and capturable. It didn't end well. Worst case scenario you get a side that has a) capture savvy/ninja people b) enough pvp types to repel any attempts to oust A group and c) a blend of the two when A and B get bored and go elsewhere. Eventually one side will hold EVERYTHING for eternity and commodities will become outright unattainable unless you join the side that has EVERY village/towne. It's a great system, it's just has that one glaring weakness. It'd turn into shrine wars. No one likes shrine wars. Then the next thing will be asked to implement some kind of npc standing army to keep everyone happy-ish, and we'd be right back where we are now. With townes that are easily managed, and have no real reason to be around other than to give a realistic source for the main cities/council to have certain commodities they wouldn't other wise have. IE Ithaqua and most non-meat based food products.
Perhaps instead of players. Mobs. I mean Pol'pera lives in constant fear of orc raids, for example. It'd give non-pvp types something to do beyond autobash an area ad infinitum, which i feel like is kinda needed more than more pvp reasons. We have -some- pvp reasons. IE shardfalls, the boneyard stuff and yes the pvp loving crowd is bored of those, but seriously... what about us bashers?
^^This was my thought too, as we've been down that road in other ways, and I'd prefer not to do it with townes too when we should know better - and it's nice when people can express that they disagree without saying "hahahahaha that is the stupidest thing I have ever heard it could never work" or opening their argument with "on Bellatores..." as if this is necessary to reinforce their arguments (note that the clan owner never opens his statements with that phrase, ever). Anyway, I hope we get some form of meaningful city raiding back that raiders and defenders can live with, that helps make people feel more invested in things.
Perhaps instead of players. Mobs. I mean Pol'pera lives in constant fear of orc raids, for example. It'd give non-pvp types something to do beyond autobash an area ad infinitum, which i feel like is kinda needed more than more pvp reasons. We have -some- pvp reasons. IE shardfalls, the boneyard stuff and yes the pvp loving crowd is bored of those, but seriously... what about us bashers?
Khizan's First Law of Events: If a non-combatant cares about an event enough to get involved, a combatant is going to care enough to kill them over it.
Unless the administration specifically comes out and says "There is no PK allowed here", somebody is going to look at the event and come up with a reason to kill you over it. I don't care what it is.
That aside, orc waves attacking Pol'pera will be exactly like caravans. Basically, they will release a system and it will be exciting for a week and then you'll realize they they have forgotten about the system entirely and have absolutely no plans whatsoever for it and then you will start gagging the cries for help and telling newbies to ignore them because you can't be bothered to interrupt what you're doing because that stuff happens so often that you just no longer give a damn.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
Why not make it a monthly 'quest'/event/occurance for the townes to get raided/ransacked/pillaged. Not often enough to be hilariously spammy like the caravans, but not so intermittent that its completely forgotten. Also gives time for devs to add curve balls or something. Get rid of the caravans, maybe? From what i understand they were mainly for quartz. Which we now all seem to have maxed out the use of. Unless i'm wrong. I'm still new-ish. So it's not impossible that I'm wrong (and i'm 'arguing' with Khizan, the likelihood is somewhere in the danger zone)
Fail to do it, you lose your workers in that towne. Fail enough times, you lose the towne entirely until you get your act together and retake it. Frankly i just want the townes to be something other than comm generators. Else why bother with citizenship in them at all, even governing positions? Just chuck the commands under one of the ministries and be done with it. Most of the townes have some kind of 'protect us, we give you swag money' deal in their story.
I think the amount of shards that drop per shardfall is too high currently. With the low population of the game (less competition) one shardfall can probably cover most people's shard usage for at least a week.
I am looking at baby RG's mudlet profile. Although she had over a hundred shards (maybe even around 200?) I never uncommented shard heal for her in mudlet. And that was by design. Because I knew I didn't have enough shards to use it reliably. And it wasn't that she wasn't going to shard falls... I am about to do the same with Jules (remove shard heal). I will go to a shardfall under two conditions:
1) It's truly unattended and I want to have the shards to use in actual fights. For a while, a few of us were actually trying to create a shortage by keeping things harvested, too (there were too many shards though). If someone shows up and I can't hold my own though, my answer is not "lol, if they kill me I will just come back over and over and never engage them and try to run around getting the shards". I run, and unless I can start a real fight by calling in a reinforcement or two, I'm done.
2) I am there to try to fight with my team. Not immediately overwhelm the other side so we can sit there and harvest. Fights. The potential problem here is that a true shortage might mean a lot more "win at all costs" type of fights, and those can be surprisingly boring and one-sided.
If I can't do one or both of those things with a certain level of success, I just start crossing shard skills off my list.
That said, I still agree that we should try dropping the number of shards in general to something that feels more like a shortage for our current population, and also get rid of single falls for the time being. I will go even further and say that shardfalls should be in smallish areas with a limited number of rooms (places like Cinua), and those rooms should have unique names (no Bardosi, for example). As well, the "bug" where shardfalls kept happening in the same places? Make that a feature, so that the big guys can basically patrol them. All of this will cut down drastically on the lone guy, who isn't even interested in a fight, skulking around for the shards - the kind of people that, honestly, if it's just them at a shardfall, I probably just leave them alone. Because even successfully chasing them off is zero fun (I think for them too).
Longterm, I think making the shardfalls more predictable, and in places where it's hard to run around, might be even more important than the numbers. I also think we should maybe just dispense with them being invisible indoors, despite the new artie for that.
People who want to kill people are shockingly lazy about watching for the shardfalls sometimes. I can't even count the number of times I've got a shardfall e-mail (before they broke and were no longer in sync with the shardfalls), logged in, and no one knew where the shardfall was. I'd scout around and try to find it, and if I did, we'd have some fights... but often by the time I found it, IF I found it, half the damn shards were gone, so there were fewer fights than there could have been.
I think we should be very willing to roll it back, because of all of the discussions we've had before about power players and power factions, but I am willing to see what happens.
EDIT: if you do ratchet down the number of shardfall areas, maybe make it so there can't be any shrines in them. Or at least no shrines with relics, so that people can build through the area, but not use relics within it. I do think shrines with relics could become part of the landscape if there were only certain shardfall areas. Maybe people would even prefer that, but it should at least be considered beforehand.
Hrm. Juran just moved to AM. If he remains mostly dormant, I guess it just doesn't matter, but the last thing we need is a restacking of AM with arties, high skill level, and top tier leadership when we've been grappling with the idea of how to unstack it for probably a year minimum (while not simply overstacking another faction, of course).
Hrm. Juran just moved to AM. If he remains mostly dormant, I guess it just doesn't matter, but the last thing we need is a restacking of AM with arties, high skill level, and top tier leadership when we've been grappling with the idea of how to unstack it for probably a year minimum (while not simply overstacking another faction, of course).
It's okay. Either way, I have it under really good authority that my insistence on playing only Priest this time around makes me entirely irrelevant in team fights.
What is the draw of the stacking of pvp players in one organization within this game? Seems to have led to the current mindset of there is nobody to fight against? Maybe I am missing something
Friends. Being with like-minded people. Feeling like your playstyle is truly welcome and fully embraced. It's why I didn't want to leave. It's why no one wants to leave. Also, frankly, no one in AM seems to want to touch demonic with a ten foot pole, and that limits the options.
Still seems odd to me. Friends is one thing, but all migrating to the same place doesn't seem to be an answer. No challenge, and easier gains? Sort of sticks to my point I made about how group fighting in this game is more encouraged than single fighting.
As a pvp player, I couldn't really see myself going to where the other pvp players are because that just creates well what this game currently has.
Comments
Predator is a garbage tier trap class. It is so utterly unworkable in PvP that Septus and I have been completely unable to make it work with L2/3 sitara and +3 strength and artifact dartsheaths. After a lot of thought and work, my group combat plan for predator is "change stance vae-sant" into "quickdraw claymore|slash target". Yes, my combat plan is the Inept 50% stance skill and trans weaponry. This class is completely and totally awful in PvP with no realistic progression path at all.
It is an absolute newbie trap and I see tons of newbies go "Oh, your advice for predator PvP is 'it doesn't exist, we cannot make it work even with thousands of dollars worth of artifacts, go outrider while you still have 90% lesson regain'? That's pretty depressing" and then they're never seen again.
At the very least you should remove predator as an option from the newbie introduction or make a note like "HEY THIS CLASS IS COMPLETE TRASH IN PVP AND IT IS LITERALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO KILL WITH. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED. ARE YOU SURE YOU WANT TO PLAY THIS CLASS? [Y/N]"
Honestly, this class should be revamped before monk. It should have been revamped before Diabolist and before Berserker. It is a giant gaping wound that bleeds newbies and it has been one for years and it should be an absolute immediate priority.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
First, the classes that go neutral should be the weaker classes. I have been convinced of this. Less impact on balance, they'll get the extra attention they need, and the strongest classes are(for the most part) the most thematic classes.
Second, the release should go in waves. Say, release one class from each faction every month. This gives the game time to settle and it gives time to address issues.
Third, the stronger classes should stay faction bound, at least for now. This has the least impact on balance, and it avoids the issue where AM gets something awesome like mage and magick gets something like predator.
Fourth, don't release predator. It's bad enough that newbies from one faction get stuck in the trap. Don't let the entire game put their foot in it.
With that said, this is what I'd keep faction specific.
Demonic
-->Summoner: Ranged. Very powerful. Very thematic.
-->Deathknight: Very powerful, very thematic, knight class so every circle already has one.
-->Diabolist: Lots of useful utility, good damage, super thematic. Maybe swap with defiler?
Magick:
-->Druid: Ranged. Very powerful and thematic.
-->Runeguard: Powerful, thematic, knight.
-->Bard: Mage would be more thematic but Bard has bigger balance implications, with buffstacking and such. Could also see keeping Mage and releasing Bard. Bard is thematically weaker and mechancally stronger, Mage is the flip side. Could go either way.
AM:
-->Priest: Thematic, decently powerful, absolve has huge synergy problems with other circles.
-->Templar: Thematic, shares Devotion, knight.
-->Outrider: Powerful, huge balance implications. Not as thematic but it's an allstar powerhouse class that would be a legit unfair trade if other circles got it. Also has some huge synergy potential with other professions.
-->Monk: This is temporary. During the monk revamp monks would lose their ranged skills and priests would gain a ranged shieldbreaker, ranged strip, ranged damage, and ranged hinder. Then monk would go public.
--Note: I would be willing to consider giving other circles outrider and just flat out keeping monk, maybe. My problem with it is that it's a hugely popular power class, and every other powerful profession trading sides is pretty skill-intensive and unpopular. It would be a huge power increase for demonic and magick while AM would be gaining classes that very few people actually can play properly. AM is on top right now so maybe it's a sacrifice that could be justified, but it strikes me as a bit inequitable that AM would be giving out its strongest and most popular profession in return for what's basically the stuff nobody else likes.
When you discount predator, that leaves each circle with 3 classes going public. I'd release them like this:
ranger/assassin/renegade: fairly unpopular professions, shouldn't skew things too badly. AM basically gets one profession and magick and demonic both get ranger due to assassin and renegade being basically identical. Maybe convert all renegades to assassins and give the new combined assassin class a CHOOSE SPEAR/CHOOSE TRIDENT type of thing?
hunter/defiler/berserker: Some powerful classes with good synergies.
mage/wytch/monk: this would be dependent on the monk revamp being done, but this would be the star professions being released. Most powerful, with the most balance implications.
predator: whenever you make it less garbage, really.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
Some sidenotes:
Now that Bard sketches uses Magick professions, I would argue that Bard is just as thematically tied to Magick as Mage is or more. If Bard was released as neutral, they would either have to rely on finding Magickers to sit still and sketch them to use their Magick-themed sketches or we would have to make sketch skills and abilities for all professions.
Predator/Assassin/Renegade should be released all at the same time. Assassin and Renegade should be merged as professions and be given an option to either summon a lamia from the Demon Plane or the Phantom from the Elemental (cannot have both at the same time).
I agree that Predator should not be released until the class has been fixed so we should delay releasing neutral professions until we have finished the Monk revamp and had a revamp for Predator.
Holding off on neutral professions will allow us to give our full attention to the Monk Revamp, the ranged ability transfer from monk to priest and the revamp of Predator.
edit: Don't give predators a back damage kill, instead I think it would be more interesting if they could benefit from mechanics similar to fractures. Fractures are limb specific breaks that used health sips to cure. Uncured Fractures cause recurring afflictions.
I could see Predator as a class that either pressures health due to health sips being used to cure fractures or lead into ciriosis because fractures are not cured leading to affliction overload. Of course we do not have to take everything about fractures as it is, but I like the idea of heath sips being used to cure things thus forcing a choice between damage and afflictions.
I agree with the rest of Khizan/Iluv's posts though. I think a mass release is risky-there'll almost certainly be some minor issues with each release, but a lot of minor issues add up quickly. One per circle per month just seems like it'd be way more painless.
Monk losing ranged in its revamp and priest picking it up seems like the most elegant solution, as that's the only reason holding monk back from neutrality. Then the end goal could be outrider/priest/templar for Am, which is both thematic (priest/templar antioch, outrider Ithaqua) and a pretty good mix of factional options. Currently you can't really make monk neutral if summoner/druid stay factionalised (which I think they should), which is a shame because monk really has no thematic value in terms of the Antimagick circle. Fortunately that's probably the one profession most well placed to change, given its pending revamp. Bonus: doing that is basically a new class, as releasing the monk revamp to everyone after its changes is pretty much that.
My list would probably be:
Month 1: assassin/renegade, ranger. You could do predator here but I share Khizan's concerns on that one: predator really is an unplayable profession in modern imperian, and will likely just make the newbie trap more of an issue if neutral until resolved.
Month 2: berserker, hunter, diabolist. Diab might be an unpopular opinion but I actually feel Defiler is a far more thematic profession for the Demonic circle, and you already get demonic summoning representation with summoner. Giving some Khandava representation in the class spread is good. This could definitely work with releasing defiler too though.
Then pending monk rework: Monk, predator, mage, wytch. I still think mage is a better pick for the magick circle thematically, but I definitely see where Iluv's coming from with some of his concerns. Mage is the safer option to release in terms of stability.
We were considering a slow release anyways, so that will probably happen, with just 3 professions in the first go around.
With monk gone I think you could patch a back damage kill into Predator without much problem at all. Maybe something about stabbing you in the spine? Spines seem like a predator thing.
Then they'd just need a decent way to account for parry since they lack cripple/strike/jpk. Maybe Predators could get a mode they activate where if a predator breaks one leg while the other leg is also damaged, they automatically kick your legs out from under you? This would let you feint into a break without having to bladesurge for feint/hit/hit/trip.
Then you just switch change the stance system up. Right now the stance system is crazy. I know, I know, I used to say it wasn't that bad, but that was rose-tinted classes and I was wrong. Because right now, it works like this: There are 5 stances. So for one combo I need to come up with 5 possible attack patterns that account for my current stance. And each stance also needs an attack pattern for rebounding being up. Then it needs a completely different one for shield being up, because some attacks go through rebounding but not shield and they can be useful for stance changing into raze. So that's 15 attack strings I need to come up with for one attack. Then you add bladesurge and now I need one version of every one of those attack strings that has been modified for bladesurge, so I went from 15 to 30. Then I need a couple of strings for shield and rebounding both. This adds up to something like 30+ possible states to track in every attack. It gets a bit insane.
So what I'd do there make every knifeplay ability work from every stance. Most of the important abilities can already be chained. Then I'd remove stance change from each ability, so that you always stayed in one stance, and make stances static bonuses. Just change Vae-Sant so that it only applies to Predation abilities.
I really think you could get predator workable pretty easily. This stuff would probably cover most of it. Sure, it would have some big issues with Beastmastery being clunky and unfun, but the profession would have a kill again, which is what it really needs.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
My take on it is that no matter how much balancing is done, combat is focused around the leaders. You can fix as many classes as you want, balance as many abilities as you can, improve the distribution as much as possible, but actual yield of your effort is going to be minuscule unless you can retain three or four capable combat leaders who have sufficient presence to command the twenty or so B-listers around.
This will not change simply because the vast majority of players will simply want to press a button and win. This has not changed in the last three years I've been around, nor has it probably changed since the opening of Imperian.
My personal gripe with having to lead combat lies around trying to account for one particular ability, namely, the Raksha band. We can balance as many classes as possible, create as many variables as possible, shift populations around as much as possible (if it were even possible), and in the hands of a capable combatant, this skill can dramatically shift battles. While this is a great thing in my opinion, for the vast majority of players in a small population base, fighting against a Raksha band is a losing proposition and can and has led to player loss. While the introduction of shackles and chains have ameliorated this combat advantage some what, the skill has repeatedly caused disgruntlement and frustration that I have personally witnessed across the rings I have been in.
In short, my position is thus: you can run as many balancing acts and classleads as you want, but until you provide a reasonable expectation while combating a Raksha band, most people will eventually forgo combat as an exercise in futility.
The other major combat decider that should have a discussion of its own is healing stacks; one that @Lionas had previously proposed a considered approach for but was relatively ignored.
So, balance all you want, divvy up the professions as much as you want, change finishers all you can, but managing outlier expectations should be a considered priority.
If the raiders win, they do a small amount of temporary cosmetic damage to the city.
I do think it would require city defenses that aren't quite so incredibly strong. I actually wonder if we might have the strongest city defenses of any game. Not sure, but I have a feeling we're near the top. Weaker defenses might also mean more chances to for people (who are not Septus) to go after bountied people, people holding monos, Champions.
I was thinking about what Zerin said today though. There is something about defending your home turf (or attacking an enemy's home turf). People hate it, but they also love it. And this system might make it bearable to do something that is always going to inherently have MUCH more emotional investment - not even just for the more RP centric player, but really, probably for just about any player.
The traditional (camp their city, kill their guards, all that good stuff) is fun for the raiders. Its not fun for the defenders, because their only recourse is to suck it up until the raiders get bored.
The other type of raiding is where you give a definite win condition for defenders. This makes it (usually) fun for both sides, because the defenders can actually win in such a way that isn't "ok guys, I think they're bored now. Good job, see you tomorrow for round 476. Chin up, eventually they'll lose interest and move onto somebody else."
Raiders love the first type of raiding. Overall, its more fun for them. 99% of defenders hate it.
Both raiders and defenders will enjoy the second type (generally speaking, you can't please everyone). Clear winner, really.
Imo, you need some form of raiding system. Its too early for me to properly articulate why, but I think without one cities lose a lot of their intrinsic value to the game atmosphere. Defending something against a hostile force gives it psychological value. Cultivating that attachment changes cities from somewhere to hang out to somewhere to be invested in.
Eventually one side will hold EVERYTHING for eternity and commodities will become outright unattainable unless you join the side that has EVERY village/towne. It's a great system, it's just has that one glaring weakness. It'd turn into shrine wars. No one likes shrine wars.
Then the next thing will be asked to implement some kind of npc standing army to keep everyone happy-ish, and we'd be right back where we are now. With townes that are easily managed, and have no real reason to be around other than to give a realistic source for the main cities/council to have certain commodities they wouldn't other wise have. IE Ithaqua and most non-meat based food products.
Perhaps instead of players. Mobs. I mean Pol'pera lives in constant fear of orc raids, for example. It'd give non-pvp types something to do beyond autobash an area ad infinitum, which i feel like is kinda needed more than more pvp reasons. We have -some- pvp reasons. IE shardfalls, the boneyard stuff and yes the pvp loving crowd is bored of those, but seriously... what about us bashers?
Unless the administration specifically comes out and says "There is no PK allowed here", somebody is going to look at the event and come up with a reason to kill you over it. I don't care what it is.
That aside, orc waves attacking Pol'pera will be exactly like caravans. Basically, they will release a system and it will be exciting for a week and then you'll realize they they have forgotten about the system entirely and have absolutely no plans whatsoever for it and then you will start gagging the cries for help and telling newbies to ignore them because you can't be bothered to interrupt what you're doing because that stuff happens so often that you just no longer give a damn.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
Unless i'm wrong. I'm still new-ish. So it's not impossible that I'm wrong (and i'm 'arguing' with Khizan, the likelihood is somewhere in the danger zone)
Fail to do it, you lose your workers in that towne. Fail enough times, you lose the towne entirely until you get your act together and retake it. Frankly i just want the townes to be something other than comm generators. Else why bother with citizenship in them at all, even governing positions? Just chuck the commands under one of the ministries and be done with it. Most of the townes have some kind of 'protect us, we give you swag money' deal in their story.
1) It's truly unattended and I want to have the shards to use in actual fights. For a while, a few of us were actually trying to create a shortage by keeping things harvested, too (there were too many shards though). If someone shows up and I can't hold my own though, my answer is not "lol, if they kill me I will just come back over and over and never engage them and try to run around getting the shards". I run, and unless I can start a real fight by calling in a reinforcement or two, I'm done.
2) I am there to try to fight with my team. Not immediately overwhelm the other side so we can sit there and harvest. Fights. The potential problem here is that a true shortage might mean a lot more "win at all costs" type of fights, and those can be surprisingly boring and one-sided.
If I can't do one or both of those things with a certain level of success, I just start crossing shard skills off my list.
That said, I still agree that we should try dropping the number of shards in general to something that feels more like a shortage for our current population, and also get rid of single falls for the time being. I will go even further and say that shardfalls should be in smallish areas with a limited number of rooms (places like Cinua), and those rooms should have unique names (no Bardosi, for example). As well, the "bug" where shardfalls kept happening in the same places? Make that a feature, so that the big guys can basically patrol them. All of this will cut down drastically on the lone guy, who isn't even interested in a fight, skulking around for the shards - the kind of people that, honestly, if it's just them at a shardfall, I probably just leave them alone. Because even successfully chasing them off is zero fun (I think for them too).
Longterm, I think making the shardfalls more predictable, and in places where it's hard to run around, might be even more important than the numbers. I also think we should maybe just dispense with them being invisible indoors, despite the new artie for that.
People who want to kill people are shockingly lazy about watching for the shardfalls sometimes. I can't even count the number of times I've got a shardfall e-mail (before they broke and were no longer in sync with the shardfalls), logged in, and no one knew where the shardfall was. I'd scout around and try to find it, and if I did, we'd have some fights... but often by the time I found it, IF I found it, half the damn shards were gone, so there were fewer fights than there could have been.
I think we should be very willing to roll it back, because of all of the discussions we've had before about power players and power factions, but I am willing to see what happens.
EDIT: if you do ratchet down the number of shardfall areas, maybe make it so there can't be any shrines in them. Or at least no shrines with relics, so that people can build through the area, but not use relics within it. I do think shrines with relics could become part of the landscape if there were only certain shardfall areas. Maybe people would even prefer that, but it should at least be considered beforehand.
As a pvp player, I couldn't really see myself going to where the other pvp players are because that just creates well what this game currently has.