I had a feeling this was going to happen.

LDoN will be for groups ONLY. Groups of 5 or 6 only to be more specific. When the expansion was first announced I had a bad feeling they would do that. When they said that they would have zones designed for smaller groups of 5-6, I hoped that they just meant they'd be designed for 5-6, not restricted to 5 or 6.

I usually group with 1 or 2 others or solo. It's rare that I'm in a full group, or even a group of 5. I was really looking forward to a dungeon crawl with a friend or 2, but it seems that won't be possible if this article is any indication:

www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/e...30604.html

I must say that I did somewhat see this coming for a few reasons:

1. The grouping EXP bonus. (specifically the extra boost you get with 6) --- I liked the idea of this, but now I understand what they were setting up for.

2. The polls they conducted at log in asking if you group or solo more.

3. Instanced dungeons. The server load would likely be very high if 300 solo druids, necros, and mages each had their own version of a dungeon on each server. --- I wish I had an answer for this, but I don't. It just bugs be that I can't use the expansion with 2 friends.

If SOE would just stop swinging the nerf bat at those of us that like to solo a bit, there wouldn't even be an issue here. An expansion that caters to groups only would be fine if there was also un-nerfed content for solo players.

SOE announced that they were working on 2 expansions right now. I wonder if the next one is solo only to balance things.

/em laughs at his last statement.

Durax Stormwolf
60 Druid

Think outside the box. Create a dungeon with 5 people (use some bots if you have to), then simply have the extras camp or gate out.

hehe thought of that...

However, I'm not sure how or if that will work. Not enough info so far. If it does work then....nm lol

Durax Stormwolf
60 Druid

Well, if it doesn't work, then we will have a lot of angry folks. People go LD a lot in this game, and to have someone going LD crash the entire instanced dungeon is a fatal design choice....

A system that looks out for such things already exists in the game - its called the flag system.

Someone in raid go LD and your raid drops below the numbers needed to bring people into an unflagged zone? No problem - they get three minutes, then they poof out of the zone.

Same thing can be done with LDoN. Your group member goes LD? No problem, your group get five minutes. Then you all get ported. Will there be complaints? Certainly. Then they'll make it ten minutes.

Just the cynical side of me speaking :)

Awsome. I think this expansion is going to rock.

I like the expansion as well, even though I used to solo for the large part.

I think I will return to the game for this. The reason is that I am hoping that it will make it easier to log in with a few people and progress. Granted you better have 6 people as one is bound to drop on average. If two people can't make it I guess its off to other content.

Funny enough I never really considered that the solo hit would be pretty hard. You get the raid expansion, the solo nerf, and now the single group expansion. You have a point that solo play-style people are getting the shaft pretty hard. I think they may find a fair share of their market quitting.

I also have my doubts that they will implement the technology properly (including the balancing tech) and the same people will be LFG as before.

Its all well and good if they have some high ideals that solo people will be brought into the fold and get groups. Some consideration for people who choose to play that way should be able.

I hope to high hell that ANY ANY ANY 5 - 6 classes can enter a dungeon and have nearly identical success in the same amount of time.

I hope you as a soloer are not to hard hit if it does not work out that you can grab a pickup group essentially right away and enter a dungeon come out in 1 - 2 hrs. This takes care of people who solo due to time constraints.

As for solo content perhaps more will open up as people more to LDoN and more graduate to PoP. But yeah you should get new content as a soloer you pay to play as everyone else. Them dictating play style when they cant get their friggin act together and improve the gameplay and balance is absurd.

From someone who likes to have a lot of options in how I play the game - solo, duo, trio, full group or whatever I'm in the mood for, I think this restriction (if in fact it's true) is very lame.

Sheesh guys they come up with a neat idea and soloers get all out of whack. Get over it =P so every expansion is not for you? they are trying to appeal to hundreds of thousands of players.

My guess is the dungeons will be designed such that most soloers wouldn't do very well anyway. Think of the traps in grieg's end that spawn several mobs at once. Imagine if they saw invis. Maybe some of them will be randomly immune to snare or mez. Maybe some will proc a short duration lure based root. Who knows.

Until you see what's actually in the dungeons, I wouldn't get too upset about not being able to enter solo--you might not want to anyway. They're being balanced for a full group, right?

Quote: I hope to high hell that ANY ANY ANY 5 - 6 classes can enter a dungeon and have nearly identical success in the same amount of time.[/quote]

Somehow I doubt we'll ever see a dungeon balanced in such a way that a group of pure meleers could survive it.

Quote: Somehow I doubt we'll ever see a dungeon balanced in such a way that a group of pure meleers could survive it.[/quote]

They'd need a pretty mean Bind Wounds chain to keep up with the damage, that's for sure. :-)

I was thinking much the same thing!

Hey, I did have a rather successful 3 monk / 2 warrior / 1 SK group in Karnor's back in the day...:)

Quote: Sheesh guys they come up with a neat idea and soloers get all out of whack. Get over it =P so every expansion is not for you? they are trying to appeal to hundreds of thousands of players.[/quote]

Which is why they should appeal to ALL playstyles, not force you into a cookie cutter mold after the game has allowed that much freedom for 4 years.

Hehe, one of my RL Friends is a 63 war and his wife is a 59 wizzy atm. And a few good guild friends this expansion wont be so bad as it will give us more places to go together other then just grinding in PoV. While I am upset, im also eager to see this zone. Hopefully they will add more solo content. I do agree that it's not right to make a 40zone expansion then not a single one that can be solo'ed, hell even the 5 zone extension we call LoY has 3 zones easily soloable. Havent tried soloing the other 2. Ohwell guess everyone has their own opinions.

Kalest MoonGlade
60th Druid of Solusek Ro

PoP is full of outdoor zones and solo spots. It's nice to see them putting dungeons back into the game after catering to the solo'ers and outdoors people so much.

I thought it was pretty obvious that this was going to be a group only expansion. It's not like they're taking solo spots away from previous expansions, there just won't be any in this one. *shrug*

So far, I don't see a reason to order this expansion. I'll have to hear some really great reviews from my friends before it will interest me.

Reading the Gamespot article it sounds like the dungeons wont be tailored much (not a very big shock). It will vary depending on the levels of your group members and the type of encounter you choose (dunno exactly what options they will give here). So it looks like you cant just throw a group together and have success, ie, you will need to put together the holy trinity. So the classes that have trouble LFG now, wont exactly be wanted. In addition, you have the problems of being in a separate dungeon - that means no getting a new member if someone has to log early, and no getting a res from a cleric if you dont have one in your group. Plus, if anyone dies and you dont have the chanter/cleric in group no getting more buffs (at least in PoP you could leave zone and come back with buffs). Have fun trying to get a group spot since every group will want cleric, chanter, shaman, MT and 2 high DPS spots.

This expansion is sounding worse and worse for the "lesser" classes. Plus, if you already have a ton of AA points and nice gear, what exactly is this expansion going to offer? Nothing from what I've seen so far other than exploring 5 different zone types which will get old in about a week.

Quote: I thought it was pretty obvious that this was going to be a group only expansion. It's not like they're taking solo spots away from previous expansions, there just won't be any in this one. *shrug*[/quote]

As someone who solos and duos quite a bit and does a modest amount of grouping, I can live with LDoN being a group-only expansion provided SOE does one thing: insure that any spells they add in the expansion are not no-drop or, if the spells simply MUST be no-drop, put the spells in an area of the expansion where they can be acquired without a group (vendor outside a dungeon, perhaps). If they do that, I can live with the expanion being group-centric. However, the cynic in me doubts they will, since each expansion has seen spells become progressively harder for casters to obtain.

Regards,

Aldane Aglond
Ayonae Ro

Why not just play Quake or any other FPS where you can play all the solo to your hearts content? EQ isnt a game that was made for soloing. Its only an option to some people, but not meant to be the norm. EQ is supposed to be multi player based and that means groups and god forbids "interacting with other people". If you dont like it, dont buy it. No one is putting a gun to your head saying buy the next expansion.

To me the massive flooding of outdoor zones and solo spots has totally ruined the game. Where once the only good places to level were dungeons and came out with some skill and a better knowledge of your class. You now have a bunch of over buffed, over twinked noobs who have no idea wtf they are doing and how to work together with other people to make a successful group.

(outside remark)
This was also based when the classes were more balanced and even I was able to heal in Lguk with my druid in almost any camp solo with just a slower pull rate for the group.

Solo, especaly quad kite been a huge part of my druid life in EQ. quad kited from level 30 to 60. Made several AA points by quade kite too. After PoP i stoped doing solo, was fet up with it.

Well now i look forward to some FUN group exp/farm spots =)

Quote:
EQ is supposed to be multi player based and that means groups and god forbids "interacting with other people".
[/quote]
That's fine. I enjoy interacting with other people. I also enjoy eating Oreos. If I had to have Oreos forced down my throat in four-hour sesssions, they would rapidly lose their appeal. When I see this sort of shout:

player_01 shouts, "level 45 ranger LFG, please, please!"

I feel really bad for the person, it sort of turns my stomach, and I realize why I played a solo-capable class.

Quote: Why not just play Quake or any other FPS where you can play all the solo to your hearts content?[/quote]

Since when is Quake and other FPS games considered solo games? This statement really irks me because it demonstrates a vast indifference and indeed ignorance of genres of gaming, and is yet used throughout by almost anyone arguing against soloing in EQ. Where did they all get the idea that FPS's are a good demonstration of solo games? It's almost completely opposite to factual evidence. Let's see:

1) FPS games are usually geared towards online play, either in competitive DM or team-based CTF/Team Fortress games; modern day FPS's are more like a form of competitive sport than anything else, and competitive sports are by no means a one-man game
2) If the example had been Doom or Doom II, I could *sorta* understand the soloing aspect of it, but Quake did not earn its fame from having a great single-player campaign as Doom or Doom II did
3) FPS's are not roleplaying games, so what's the logic in telling a soloer, who plays EQ to develop his character, to play Quake, where the point is to develop his shooting skills?

Next time you want to tell soloers off, at least give some accurate examples. I suggest CRPGs - Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, Fallout, Arcanum, or best yet: Morrowind. These are examples of "solo" games that still retain the RPG aspects of EQ and are far more fitting examples than FPS's can ever be of the "soloing" experience.

EQ is supposed to be multi player based and that means groups and god forbids "interacting with other people".


Bzzttt...wrong answer.

Multiplayer based has nothing to do with having a formal "group." Groups are one way of interacting with other people, but it is FAR from the only way. In addition, the grouping mechanism has ANTI-social influences as well as pro-social.

Multiplayer based does NOT mean "groups"....

I made the original post and would like to clarify something.

The title of my post aside, my main concern is that this will be a 5-6 man group only expansion. I can live with not being able to solo there. I do understand that server space may become a huge issue if "instanced zones" are used to solo. As stated I mostly believe this is a blow to solo players because it doesn't provide *any* zones to solo in. I would love it if they had 40 instanced zones and 5 normal zones that were soloable.

To say that this game is only for grouping is nuts. It is so arrogant to tell people that they have no right to play the game in the way they enjoy it. However, as this and other boards consistently show, there will always be
a few people that will tell those who choose a different path, that they have no right to do so.

Certain classes have problems getting groups, and this problem will get worse with the new expansion, not better. Those classes that have a hard time being selected won't have the *option* of finding 1 or 2 partners and experience the zones anyway.

This is my main issue. If they want to prevent solo characters from using the "instanced zones", I just wish they would balance this by doing the following:

1. Put 4-5 zones in the expansion that aren't "instanced zones"

2. Allow ALL single groups access to the "instanced zones". Not just groups of 5-6, but groups of 2-6. ( I realize soloing is a sin, but is it a sin to be in a small group too?)

3. Please don't end the dungeon crawl in these zones when a member of the party goes LD, has to camp, or otherwise needs to leave. This would make a lot of people upset.

4. Please stop squeezing the small groups and soloers out of the older content. There is room in this game for every playing style. The attitude of "If you don't like it, play Quake" is just idiotic. As stated, there is room in the game for us all.

Durax Stormwolf
60 Druid

i dont really exp much anymore, but the idea of 'needing' to group means i wont bother even ordering this expansion unless it gives something else outside of these dungeon zones (LoY gave dyes + bank space, only reason i bought it)
will see what people say about it when they get it before i decide to get it myself, but if its an exp'ing expansion only, i have no interest unless i can plevel alts there :p (which doesnt sound like it)
Sounds a very specialist expansion really, and caters for only one playing style of people, really poor move unless the next expansion is 'raiding' or 'soloing' only expansion :p

Quote:
Multiplayer based has nothing to do with having a formal "group."
[/quote]

That's a theory, but not one that the evidence supports.

Soru

Since no one has brought this up. Might as well be the first.

**********************
Leader: /shout "Starting a dungeon group for LDoN need one more member!"

Druid: /tell leader: "I wish to join your group."

Leader: /tell Druid: "Sorry but I heard only half your spells work in dungeons, do you have a wizard alt?"

Druid: /tell leader: "No only some of my spells don't work, can I please join?"

Leader: /tell Druid: "Ummm, sorry we just filled the last spot =(."

**************

Hey, some one had to say it. If not me, it would EVENTUALLY be another on this site. Might as well start a post to encourage other druids to help "DISPELL" all the myths other Non-Druid high level players may think of. Remember one word of mouth can help to change the masses minds.

The Truth

I hate seeing that too Bric, kind of depressing. I totally agree a multiplayer game shouldn't be about forced grouping. It's ridiculous to force people to play a certain way(beyond common sense rules) when they are paying for the experience, especially when RL may dictate the way they play. Players should ALWAYS be allowed to play how THEY see fit no matter what kind of game, within reason of course. This doesn't include cheating. :p

/scratches head

kunark - normal expansion (solo, group, raids), enormous zones with few entrances or ports, level 60
velious - normal expansion(s,g,r), linear content (since removed)
luclin - normal expansion (s,g,r), initially all travel thru nexus, then ports added (aa's added here or back in velious?)
PoP - flagged expansion, level 65, extensive inter zone connections for whole eq world
LoY - small expansion (solo, groups), smallish zones
LDON - group only expansion (lots of unknowns)

I think a legitimate complaint would be the scarcity of single group quest content in most of the previous expansions. This is a good idea, and I'm looking forward to it. Who's to know or say how LDON will work out. For instance, while the PoP flagged system is an interesting idea, in practice it has proven to be a headache for many guilds and players (i.e., it's not working as intended).

The LDON dungeons? only time will tell about them. The issues about LD's are real. You can do some things to improve connection stablity, but many things are outside of your control.

Rolaque

Coming on this thread with the tired butt lame butt argument of this is a grouping game is fools work. This is any fools game.

I hope you get some solo content in the next expansion as it seems obvious to me that this is a group expansion. You are correct, get your expectatios lowered now as solo peeps are going to lose here. (So are folks currently LFG I bet.)

I will start a different thread on how the hell Sony is going to implement a fair system by which certain classes are not going to be devestated in their ability to get a group. (So as not to derail your thread).

Quote: I think a legitimate complaint would be the scarcity of single group quest content in most of the previous expansions[/quote]

Well, this is not entirely true. Almost all quests of the inital release were solo or group based (e.g. Burning Rapier or Quest Armor). In Kunark only some of the very high end quests (VP Key) and Epics were raid business. The progressive quests for Iksar were all group orientated.

Velious changed the focus a little to raid quests (e.g. Tracker Helm, Ring War, Circlet of Falinkan) but some were still doable solo or group (e.g. Shawl Quest, Amor Sets, Wenglawks Pouch). Luclin was back to groups (e.g. group: Shield of Bane Warding, only raid quest, except VT Key, i am aware of is Earing of Veracity). LoY is totally focussed on group quest content. And PoP Quests are almost all based on raids at some point, be it for getting zone access or beating a final encounter.

Because that's just stupid. Pure soloers make up a less portion of the player base than both group players and hardcore raiders. In fact, there are *very* few pure soloers in the game. Most soloers also group, so obviously from SoE's perspective LDoN would appeal to the majority of the player base (even to raiders, since raiders group too).

It's also folly to say that PoP or whatnot are catered towards soloing. Let's be clear about this: EVERY "solo" content in the game is also "group" content, and till LDoN, this also worked vice versa. Soloers never received any content that is purely targetted towards them, because anything a soloer can do, a group can do.

For people who soloed as a hobby, that was enough. We didn't expect SoE to cater to us because we knew we were in the far minority. We just expected that they would at least leave the option open - to target groups with content, but to make it possible, at least, for soloers to eat the scraps left behind by said groups. LDoN does not allow this - from what we know, it specifically FORBIDS soloing. That is the major beef most soloers have with LDoN. We don't care if SoE wants to cater to groups. We do care, however, if they wanted to take away our ability to solo in their coming expansions altogether.

>Since no one has brought this up. Might as well be the first.
>**********************
>Leader: /shout "Starting a dungeon group for LDoN need one more member!"
>Druid: /tell leader: "I wish to join your group."
>Leader: /tell Druid: "Sorry but I heard only half your spells work in dungeons, do >you have a wizard alt?"
>Druid: /tell leader: "No only some of my spells don't work, can I please join?"
>Leader: /tell Druid: "Ummm, sorry we just filled the last spot =(."
>**************


Shrug. What do you need.

PoT9
HoR
Summers Flame
Legacy of Bracken.
Ensnare
Succor / Exodus
NI/TR/KR

Thats allmost all i use in xp groups.

I can hold an tank fully allive (if slowed) in the eplanes, or an be a decent dmg dealer only with nuking.

Tubben.

... don't like it... don't buy it!

wow!

what a concept!

if nothing else, groups will move to ldon, giving MORE places to solo!

golly!

Pure soloers make up a less portion of the player base than both group players and hardcore raiders. In fact, there are *very* few pure soloers in the game.


By that same measure, there are few pure groupers in the game. Or few pure hardcore raiders.

Not necessarily.

How many classes can solo, after all? How many solo as a means of getting exp at 60+? All those who do not - or cannot - are "pure" groupers. That's all the melees, most of the hybrids, plus clerics and possibly mages. Raiding-wise, it's the same. Most of the elite guilds in Time have as their members people who simply no longer exp - or do anything, for that matter, aside from raiding. Most members of the top guilds have 200-300+ AA's - they don't need to group or solo anymore.

Compare this to those players belonging to the "soloable" classes who actually DO solo as the primary means of getting exp and equipment and you will see that there is a definite discrepancy.

I will admit, however, that most, if not all, of EQ players have at certain times in their careers "soloed" (if only for a short time) and that soloing is something people have come to accept in EQ - regardless of class. Only extremists desire the total obliteration of soloing from EQ, which is all the more reason I believe LDoN is going too far into the extreme side of things.

Quote: Have fun trying to get a group spot since every group will want cleric, chanter, shaman, MT and 2 high DPS spots.[/quote]

It's a good thing a druid can fill 2 of those roles. Don't even try to argue that we cannot be main healer or high DPS. That would expose a rather high level of ignorance.

What I hope to see in LDoN is more of what SOE started with in LoY: decent loot for the level dropping off non-raid targets.

As it stands right now, outside of raiding there really are very few options for getting "the best gear" in the game. Tradeskills are one possibility, but the existing tradeskill system is broken - people excell in spite of it, rather than it being fun as a process. The power differance in gear between people who raid, and those who prefer not to, is absurd.

I am really hoping LDoN has some decent gear added to its loot tables, gear that would be an improvement for people who don't raid, would be comparable (or at least in the ballpark) to raid gear (make raid gear better, thats cool, just the disparity now is atrocious.) Make liberal use of the "LORE" and "Recommended/Required Level" flags if you must, but lets not require everyone to raid. :)

Quote: It's a good thing a druid can fill 2 of those roles. Don't even try to argue that we cannot be main healer or high DPS. That would expose a rather high level of ignorance.[/quote]

Sure, we can fill two of those roles, but most people, unfortunately, will continue to seek specialists who can fill the DPS and healer slots and do a better job of doing so.

"But people will take a druid for their versatility." Sure, a few people will, but the majority realize that a druid just isn't that versatile due to a nasty thing called aggro. Once in a group, if a druid tries to step outside of his or her role as either a healer OR a damager, they run a high risk of acquiring aggro (of course, what we can get away with currently depends on what plate class is tanking). As it stands, having so many high aggro spells and no way to get rid of the aggro effectively limits how much versatility we are able to exercise in groups, unlike classes that get the Spell Casting Subtlety AA, a spell to survive aggro while the tanks taunt the mob off of them, or both. So, our ability to fulfill two roles isn't as much of a draw to grouping with a druid as it could be.

Versatility means you can do multiple things, it does not necessarily imply you can do them all at the same time though. ;) For what its worth, when I want to build a group I look for a healer first, and in my mind thats a druid or a cleric. When I am looking for a DPS class, I may prefer another class for the role, but I also know that a druid can fill in well there too. In fact, I may grab an available druid fist, knowing that if the cleric has to leave that I can convert a DPS person to a healer.

Thats a benefit to me at least.

If a class is designed to be versatile and makes tradeoffs to be so, yet is unable in practice to actually BE versatile, then for all intents and purposes that class is simply a poor version of the specialist class that does a better job at whatever role is being filled by the versatile class.

Versatility means nothing if that is your strength and the game mechanics dont let you exercise it.

(Well, except when soloing when aggro doesnt matter! hehe)

Tia

I wonder if LDON will have very high ZEMS for all the dungeons, at least initially.

Versatility means this:

* Group needs a healer: a druid can do that
* Group needs DPS: a druid can do that
* Group loses their healer: druid can switch to be the healer
* Group gets a cleric: druid can switch to DPS mode
* Group hunting in a dungeon without a wizard: druid can provide transport out when the group wants to break up.

While a druid cannot do everything at the same time, they can do a lot of differant things, and that is a benefit for a group. If a druid could do everything at once, what benefit is there for wizards who cannot heal, or clerics who cannot effectively compare as DPS? The ability to fill multiple roles is balanced against not being able to do all at once (without getting aggro or running OOM) and not being able to do them as well as the specialist (who has no such versatility.)

It's a fair point that in PoP, where you can usually pick from a 'menu' of 12+ LFG people within 2 minutes travel time of your group, that versatility is not a priority.

Cleric leaves? Get another cleric, /shrug.

In LDoN, where quite likely it will be impossible to swap group members half way through a dungeon, versatility will be a lot more useful, just as it is currently outside PoP.

Soru

Versatility only gets you a group if it stacks(bard), all you non druids out there quit with the versatility crap ok? it has not and will not get druids groups.

You dont head into a dungeon thinking, maybe the cleric is going to leave, we better get a druid just in case. You dont take a druid into your group for evac, if you cant get a wizzy then you get another DPS class and take your chances.

Bottom line, if you are versatile, you need to stack. If you dont stack you are a hindrance.

If I were putting together a group for a instanced dungeon, I would want the best group I could get. Versatility probably won't matter, because if you have all the bases covered with the 6 you have, and they are all staying to complete the LDoN dungeon, then there's no need for versatility.

A member of your group of 6 goes LD, you sit and wait for them to get back (unless you're slumming). Or if you can't handle the mobs in the fight, you have the wizard evac you (assuming evac works), and you wait for them to get back.

For a tough dungeon, I'd start with having two ressers, assuming that if you die, ressing is the only way back in. I'd go with a cleric and paladin as my first choices. That one, if one resser dies, there's a good chance the other can bring him or her back in.

Those two also have healing covered. No one better for healing than a cleric, and the paladin can serve as back up if needed. The pally's group heals also fit in nicely with the group-sized raid. And the paladin will serve as a tank that can keep aggro nicely.

Assuming evac works, I'd go with a wizard. The DPS and the impressive crits when needed will help tremendously. Not to mention spellshields if needed.

An enchanter is next. Buffing, mana regen, slowing, and crowd control all wrapped up in one. Decent nukes, too, at the higher levels...almost to the level of a druid when it comes down to it.

A SS rogue for exploration, corpse dragging, and DPS. And who knows? There might be a lock or two to pick.

For the last slot I'd pick a bard or a monk for pulling expertise. Both have different styles but are good at pulling. The monk might add more DPS, but the bard could add mana regen, resists, etc., as needed. And backup crowd control for the chanter. In fact, a chanter with a high level pet survives very nicely if a bard is there to help mez on charm break.



Looking back, there is some versatility in my ideal group, of course. But it's not the type of versatility that a druid can supply. The druid would go in the cleric or wizard slots, but that's only if the better classes weren't available.

My perfect 6 man group would be myself and the first 5 other guildmates that come along. The only thing I shy away from is stacking multiple classes which turn rather redundant. Ironically, those classes are all part of the "trinity". Other than those classes, everyone else stacks quite well IMO.

I think the problem will solve itself. It's obvious that the min/maxers seek each other out, and the "could care less" crowd avoid those players like the plague.

People that insist on a cleric/tank/slower before they do anything in this game, simply are not the type of people I want to spend time with anyway. I believe many others feel the same way. I'll be over in the corner with 2 druids, a rogue, 2 bards, and a mage, having a most enjoyable afternoon.

Hands down, "unconventinal" groups have been the most fun I have ever had grinding exp in EQ.

Oh, I'll agree that unconventional groups are great fun. But it's difficult to deny the fact that Sony has exhibited an ongoing trend of placing obstacles to block anything which threatens the perception that a conventional group is best.

Why do they care to perpetuate that pereception? Because they have designed almost every encounter around the abilities and limitations of conventional groups, and Sony's developers seem to lack originality when it comes to anticipating and planning for unconventional groups.

- When they see high-reward/high-dps mobs being collected into quads where the caster isn't forced to deal with the mobs' dps, what do they do? Make those mobs immune to snare, or give them the ability to summon, or reduce the reward.

- When they see high-reward/high-hp mobs being charmed and pitted against each other, what do they do? Make those mobs immune to snare, or give them the ability to summon, or reduce the reward.

- When they see high-reward/high-hp/high-dps mobs being killed by pet groups, what do they do? Make those mobs immune to snare, or give them the ability to summon, or reduce the reward. Oh, and make sure charmed pets can't hold aggro to substitute as tank.

We can thumb our noses at Sony and say "I'm going to play this game the way *I* want to and screw your conventional groups!" But at the end of the day, groups who chose the typical tank/healer/slower strategy, will usually come out ahead. And if that is discovered to not be the case, you can almost bet money on ensuing changes and nerfs to impede other grouping combinations.

~Firemynd

Quote: Why not just play Quake or any other FPS where you can play all the solo to your hearts content?[/quote]

I hate those kind of comments. Who gives anyone the right to tell another paying player how to spend their time?

Seriously, sometimes players can't be online long enough to group. Others can't find groups in a reasonable timeframe. Others aren't even wanted in groups. Some just like the challenge of trying difficult situations alone. THe opposite is true as well.

So if a player pays his fee, and his digital bits are running around on the servers, who actually cares what those bits are doing?

As for solo instanced dungeons being a server burden, BAH. Anarchy Online has been doing this for years now.

Personally I like the idea of 1-4 players in the currently EMPTY oldworld and kunark dungeons. I started a new untwinked lowbie specifically for this purpose (and since there are soo few lowbies on Prexus outside of PC or Echo Caverns) and frequently solo dungeons. Its a blast.

Quote: But at the end of the day, groups who chose the typical tank/healer/slower strategy, will usually come out ahead.[/quote]

Come out ahead in terms of what? What exactely are the min/maxxers gaining over a non-traditional group?

Let's break it down. Loot/exp/enjoyment

Loot---That depends entirely upon location, and is certianly up for debate. A traditional and non-traditional group have access to the same exp grind locations and the possibility of the same random drops/pops. I have ground out exp/loot in LoY with 3 people and gained more plat/items than a full group of guildmates in "better" zones.

Exp---Once again, very dependant upon location. We'll just assume a tier 2-3 PoP zone for arguments sake. I have yet to see any quantifiable, tested results that show a traditional group actually nets more exp in a typical play session. I know for a fact that I have left groups that "required" a cleric for healing and was exp grinding within minutes with a non-traditional group while the original group shouted for a cleric for 20 minutes and eventually disbanded. Sure, it goes both ways, but my example is relevant and I'm sure we've all either witnessed it or been a part of a group like this ourselves.

Furthermore, it's not as though everyone is exp grinding in the Elemental planes. You need to be realistic in your opinion of a typical exp grind situation. The difference between a "trinity" group and a hodge-podge group, within a 3-4 hour playtime in the same location, would be insignifficant at best. I would bet the bank on that.

How about a non-traditional group of guildmates vs. a pick-up group full of min/maxxers? Any bets on who would "come out ahead"? No way. Too many variables. There always is and there always will be too many variables. That's why it frustrates me to see claims that traditional groups are inherently "better" than non-traditional groups. Especially when the claims are based on nothing more than personal opinion with nothing to back it up. It's simply not true.

Enjoyment---Unmeasurable. No claim on either side of the argument would be valid. It's impossible to measure or quantify "fun". It is it's own reward.

I say that all the min/maxxers rhetoric about the perfect group is just a wet dream with no basis in fact. It's just a lot of guessing.

Quote:
We can thumb our noses at Sony and say "I'm going to play this game the way *I* want to and screw your conventional groups!" But at the end of the day, groups who chose the typical tank/healer/slower strategy, will usually come out ahead. And if that is discovered to not be the case, you can almost bet money on ensuing changes and nerfs to impede other grouping combinations.
[/quote]

This is largely true, and there is a very good reason for it.

The 'conventional' group has a place for every single class in the game. Noone is automatically excluded, and the balance is not really all that far out of whack.

For random unplanned grouping styles, that's not true. A wizard is not 20% better in an an AoE group than a monk, but 10000% better. A cleric is not merely preferable to a druid, but a hard requirement, given that death every few pulls is expected. Rogues have literally nothing they can possibly do in a pet tanking group.

If your online friends would pick someone else over you for a matter of a few percentage points of exp, then maybe you need better friends. But when it becomes a matter of orders of magnitude, then people other than the parsing obsessives become affected, and that is not good.

Soru

Quote: The difference between a "trinity" group and a hodge-podge group, within a 3-4 hour playtime in the same location, would be insignifficant at best. I would bet the bank on that.[/quote]

I'd take that bet, I'll take SK, clr, enc, brd, wiz, wiz against ANY hodge-podge group. The SK can out aggro a warrior so much its not even funny, so the 2 wizards can burn to their hearts content. Sk can add FT10 to the wizards mana pools, bards are just plain over powered and the cleric is just plain needed. In PoP no matter what, some times your just plain unlucky and someone dies. Little click, virt, VoQ/VQ and your back in business.

Quote: That's why it frustrates me to see claims that traditional groups are inherently "better" than non-traditional groups. Especially when the claims are based on nothing more than personal opinion with nothing to back it up. It's simply not true.[/quote]

I didn't say traditional groups are inherantly better than non-traditional groups. I said "Sony has exhibited an ongoing trend of placing obstacles to block anything which threatens the perception that a conventional group is best." And I went on to explain why Sony will reinforce that perception by attempting to limit or restrict non-traditional groups.

The comment about a traditional group being ahead at the end of the day had nothing to do with exp grinding, and nothing to do with common plat loot that drops from common exp mobs. It was more about accomplishing worthwhile goals, like killing boss-type mobs ... not repeating the same fight with multiples of similar mobs a hundred times for an AA point.

Look at every 'boss' encounter in the game. You can't tell me that most of them aren't designed to favor a tank/heal/slow strategy. They are indeed designed that way, and this fact is reflected in the composition of the vast majority of groups and guilds.

If you wanted to kill a typical named SOL/PoP mob tomorrow, and could bring any 20 characters, which classes would be represented in your lineup? No need to reply; the game has already answered that question for at least half of your 20. And <em>that</em> is what I mean when I say trinity thinking is perpetuated by the game's design.

~Firemynd

Speaking on versatility again briefly... Of the 3 required roles for modern play, being tank, slower, and healer... a druid can only fill in for one of those roles, and only in certain situations.

That's not particularly versatile! Any other situation is highly specific at best... again, not exactly a strong point for a versatile class!

Tia

You forgot DPS. Druids can fill in 4 of the slots in a templated group, and can solo. I can't think of any class that is more versatile, although others match it.

Soru

I didnt forget it. Any class can do damage, that's not a unique role for any class.

Shamans and bards are more versatile in the 3 main areas... Clerics function fairly well as tanks too when push comes to shove... In fact most classes can fill 2 of the 3 main grouping roles. And many of those are better soloers than druids.

Tia

Quote: I'll take SK, clr, enc, brd, wiz, wiz against ANY hodge-podge group.[/quote]

I would take Pallie, Druid, Necro, Beastlord, Mage, Mage as my hodge podge group. I think too many people discount the power of pets. Still think your group will get considerably more exp than mine?

I just had a totally random pick-up group the other night consisting of a rogue, 2 druids (with charmed ravens), and 3 mages in PoN that wasted every kill in about 8-10 seconds. We never had to heal the rogue except for top off. The perfect group is not tank, cleric, shaman/enchanter any more. Not by a long shot. People need to realize that. Also, you can only kill stuff <em>so fast</em>. There comes a point in exp grinding where you overkill your spawns and you spend time looking for stuff to pull. Virtually any group make-up is capable of completely clearing a specific spawn point and waiting on repops.

Quote: Of the 3 required roles for modern play, being tank, slower, and healer... a druid can only fill in for one of those roles, and only in certain situations.[/quote]

The fact that you believe that druids can only function as a healer in "certian situations", honestly makes me question the rest of your opinions. Druids can be main healers anywhere <em>except</em> "certian situations". Please post a % as to how many exp grind situations a druid cannot function as the main healer. I'm curious what you'll come up with.

You neglect that after the trinity, people want DPS, DPS, DPS. Druids <em>easily</em> fill the DPS role, and offer much more on top of just plain DPS, such as our buffs. Pot9, Kazaad, focus is still the best bang for your buck and people know this. DS and regen make a huge psychological impact on melees. Clerics perfer back-up healers. Just ask them. Druids are the perferred back-up healers by a long shot.

We definately have a lot more going for us than we have going against us. I often wonder how people come to conclusions that believe otherwise. I'm not even factoring in various AA abilities that add so much to our class and to any group.

You will not convince me that a druid is somehow handicapped in terms of grouping, or that for 6 spots in a group, any other classes automatically trumps our position by default.

You neglect that after the trinity, people want DPS, DPS, DPS. Druids easily fill the DPS role, and offer much more on top of just plain DPS, such as our buffs.


And yet, I will never get a DPS spot while a Rogue, Necro, Wizard, Beastlord, Ranger or Mage is LFG. People don't group Druids for DPS, because you can usually find a DPS class LFG.

Quote: I just had a totally random pick-up group the other night consisting of a rogue, 2 druids (with charmed ravens), and 3 mages in PoN that wasted every kill in about 8-10 seconds. [/quote]

Take that same group to BoT or PoS and you'd have to form an entirely different strategy for hunting ... nothing for the 2 druids to charm there (edit: unless the druids have CoT and can find a lorok). Not saying you couldn't make it work, but your mages' pets would be tanking against mobs with a lot more hp and hitting a lot harder, so your druids would have been spending a greater portion of their mana on healing and contributing less on DPS.

On the other hand, move them to PoV and grab a little frog or two as pets, and you'd be rolling along nicely again. (Well, except when one of you got too much aggro on a snare-immune mob.)

Quote: There comes a point in exp grinding where you overkill your spawns and you spend time looking for stuff to pull.[/quote]

If a group can clear an area with plenty of time to spare before respawn, you're probably not getting nearly as much exp as you could be getting in a more challenging and rewarding place. But then, when you are relying upon having charmable animals as part of your hunting strategy, your group's options for locales and targets are going to be somewhat limited.

With few exceptions, nearly any 'unconventional' group will run into some limitations on where it can be successful, where it can be efficient, and what kind of loot it can acquire. Meanwhile, you can take a group with a tank/healer/slower and some DPS filler just about anywhere and kill almost anything. Starting to see my point about how the game's design favors a traditional 'trinity' type of group?

~Firemynd

Quote: I will never get a DPS spot while a Rogue, Necro, Wizard, Beastlord, Ranger or Mage is LFG. People don't group Druids for DPS, because you can usually find a DPS class LFG.[/quote]

Once again, there are too many variables to take into account in order for that to be fact. A 65 druid with 50 AAs and a full spell book is going to do more dmg than a 65 wizard or mage with none, and vice versa. Regardless, a nuking class can cream any melee in the game in terms of burst dmg. Yes, casters rely on mana, but when was the last time you had to wait on your nukers to med up during an exp grind? It just isn't an issue. If anything, the healers hold up the group needing to med. For the DPS position, I see Mages and Wizards as our only real "competition". Btw, I hate referring to other classes as comeptition...

When grouped with mages and wizards, the nuke power fluctuates a great deal thanks to EQ's random number generator. I could be getting crits left and right, while the wizard is on a bad streak. Meanwhile, the mage suddenly starts critting like mad, but only on the last cast when the MoB is at 10%. Of course, once the wizard hits a hot streak, he's throwing out some pretty amazing numbers. My favorite thing is when the wizard and I both crit our nukes, then I immediately follow up with a critical using Nature's Infusion. Nothing shuts a wise cracking wizard up faster than a 4000+ heal. It puts things in perspective for everyone present.

Btw, give me a DC pet, and a druid is easily a mage's equal in terms of long-term DPS. Give us a DC frog in PoS, and we blow wizards away without having to cast a single nuke.

Don't fool yourself. Druids are a DPS class.

Quote:
Any class can do damage, that's not a unique role for any class.
[/quote]

All classes can tank, all classes can heal (fungi and bandages), and almost all can slow (I don't think there's a monk, druid or cleric usable weapon with a slow proc). Obviously some do those things better than others, and druids do DPS better than most classes (in fact, probably better than many monks, who are usually counted as a primarily DPS class).

This kind of special pleading fools noone, except possibly yourself.

Soru

A rogue might be able to tank in PoN against ravens but take that rogue to BoT and see what happens. Druids might be able to primary heal but if they want to do it in tier 2 and above they're going to need a slower 9 times out of 10.

I had a tank get killed last night in BoT because the giant resisted slow repeatedly and I just flat out couldn't heal fast enough to compensate. As much as I love NI it still doesn't quite cut it at times like that. KR would have been too slow and Chloro wouldn't have been enough HP so NI was the only option. It failed without slow unfortunately. :mad:

For the DPS position, I see Mages and Wizards as our only real "competition".

I have no experience grouping with 65/50AA Druids. If your point is that we become a DPS class at that point, then I will concede the point - with reservations.

My "common sense" reservation is that, if we did as much damage as 65 Wizards, they would be LOUDLY complaining. I read Graffe's pretty frequently, and I can assure you that most of them feel we are no threat in the DPS department. You are implying that we do as much damage, yet they are blissfully unaware.

They do have concerns about Mage DPS vs their own.

Necros, hah. I don't believe a 61 druid will EVER outdamage a 61 necro, unless the Druid has a charmed pet. The necro doesn't even need to use DOTs or a pet, he will just flat out-nuke you. If you are saying we pull ahead of Necros in 4 levels, then I look forward to it with some skepticism.

Rogues and Rangers. I was checking the Ranger's Glade for a parse, this is literally the first one I found:
Quote:
To humor, with my current setup, in PoFire I did an aggregate 152.32 dps, with potw, avatar, Nature's Precision, Speed of Vallon having 1891 atk. This is pure melee and not counting sustained nuke damage which was 34.68 dps.

A rogue friend that I have does roughly 190 to 195 dps in the same camp on the same mobs.
[/quote]

Are you saying you break 184 DPS during a grind? Do you break 190?

Paladins. I have personally witnessed a Paladin Slay Undead on at least every other pull, sometimes back-to-back. When you see someone cleanse their blade for 1,800+ pts, 4 or 5 times on a mob, you start to wonder why Pallies fight anything BUT Undead.

I certainly take you at your word for the amount of damage you do in exp groups. I question whether your situation is the norm, and I believe I have good reason.

BTW, at 59-61, casters don't sit to med because they are managing mana. Anything over 2, maybe 3 nukes per fight means someone will be OOM soon. Melee classes are certainly competitive, damage-wise.

Lol go go personal attacks... oh well, it's not me you cheapen by doing so.

Quote: The fact that you believe that druids can only function as a healer in "certian situations", honestly makes me question the rest of your opinions. [/quote]

Who said I believe it? I've been playing a bleeding edge uber druid longer than anyone else on my server. >I< know exactly what I'm capable of. However, that doesnt matter, I dont macro an essay on the virtues of grouping a druid whenever I go LFG. You dont see "65 druid w/100+aa's in MC SCF DC etc and all spells LFG!" or at least, not very often, and I tend to chuckle sadly when I do.

Perception is reality. Fact is people believe that druids cannot tank (and we cant, really), that druids cannot slow (again, we cant, not debatable), and that we can only heal reasonably well and safely sub tier3 (you'll have to trust me that primary healing in an elemental group is simply not fun.)

Oh and btw, pallys, sk's, mages, wizzies, druids, clerics, monks, none of them can proc a slow, and necros can only slow undead. That's half the classes in EQ. And relying on a proc slow is pretty chancey... deaths tend to happen if you're not careful!

As for being a dps class, yes druids can do excellent dps... under the right circumstances. That means having a knight being main tank so that we dont peel aggro off after the 2nd nuke. Or having a dc bait animal around (rare). Or soloing!

So the fact is, a druid is not a first choice for any of the 3 main roles of a group, though we can do an ok job at healing, but still cant res. And while we can do really well at dps, that also requires fairly specific circumstances to let us use our full potential.

So how's that versatility thing again?

And please dont insult me, that's just lame. You know very well that this is more just making a point about group makeup and the reality of people's perceptions than any absolute judgement of a druid's value to a group, and to make the point that versatility is not a strength when your versatility doesnt STACK (a la bards) and your supposed versatility only allows you to cover one of the 3 required group roles anyway.

Tia

Well, maybe kind of offtopic, but i have to remind that the best way to get a group is to build one on your own.

Don't turn /lfg on and wait, it is very unlikely that you get an invitation.

Join any guild, but still make friends out of your guilds relationship, build a network of people who are playing at your times.

In the beginning of PoP i played alot at off peak times. Almost everyday i spent the first 20 mins online to gather a group in PoK by just sending tells to strangers. Sometimes i had to trick them into group ("yeah, cleric and slower already otm") but almost every time it worked. Get 2 people to join and the hard work of group building is done.

Then we went into a lower tier (mostly PoN) and just played. I always tried to be the perfect "host" for my group by organizing fair lootrules from the beginning, calling replacements in time, entertain a little, you name it. Believe it or not, i got an reputation for running groups. Nowadays, month later, i am still receiving tells asking for a place in my current group by of those strangers i had fun with back in time.

Personal relationship are succeeding each and every class issue by far. People having you on their friendlist do not care if you are "only" a druid when it comes to replace a damagedealer in their group. The larger your people network, the less /lfg time you will ever have. That easy.

Quote:
So the fact is, a druid is not a first choice for any of the 3 main roles of a group,
[/quote]

15 classes, 4 (not 3) roles, you do the math.

druids are 2nd best healers, and somewhere between 5th and 8th in DPS. This is distinctly above average in terms of relative power.

If there is a class that scores significantly better than that, name them here so SOE can nerf them.

Soru

This update has NOTHING ot do with soloing. In fact SOE has no intention of either helping or hindering soloing. This expansion is to fix the HORRENDOUS problem of uber guilds. The only way to get anyting decent in this game is to be in an uber guild. So they fixed that problem by instituting a system wherby a single group could do something useful. Great fix. You are paranoid if you think they did this to nerf soloing. You can still solo. Nothing has changed at all about soloing. And you coudl never solo in a dungeon before so how do you figure them not letting you solo in the new dungeons is a nerf? :-)

Quote: The only way to get anyting decent in this game is to be in an uber guild. [/quote]

That's flat out wrong.

Quote: And you coudl never solo in a dungeon before so how do you figure them not letting you solo in the new dungeons is a nerf? :-)[/quote]

Tell that to my necro. It would be news to him that he couldn't solo in dungeons before LDoN. :p

Regards,

Aldane Aglond
Ayonae Ro

And you coudl never solo in a dungeon before so how do you figure them not letting you solo in the new dungeons is a nerf? :-)


Why bother talking to a necro...I was soloing in dungeons since pre-Kunark. That's where I started slam kiting, and learning how to root-dot one nanometer outside the mob's melee range. I also have soloed in Kunark dungeons, Velious dungeons, Luclin dungeons, and PoP and LoY indoor zones. If push comes to shove, I could probably solo in a LDoN dungeon as well.

Of course, I don't expect to last long by myself in a top difficulty dungeon....:)

I am curious, lets say it is for only groups of 5-6 players. What happens when a groupmate goes LD, or dies, or gates out.

When does the dungeon boot the rest of the party?

There are prob still many questions about this we wont know until it is live, but who knows. I will prob buy it because I am sure at some point I will be in a group and want to go explore.

Quote: The only way to get anyting decent in this game is to be in an uber guild[/quote]

What he means is the only way to get the BEST stuff is to be in an uber guild. He's correct, fortunately.

Is ornate armor not "decent stuff"?

Are the PoP mini drops not "decent stuff"?

Your perspective of decent should be attained by comparing loot to what you have currently, not comparing it to what other people have.

I've had a lot of fun in EQ over the years, but the most fun has been recently on Prexus playing an untwinked / un-KEI'd / unpowerleveled necro and "crawling" all of the now totally empty oldworld dungeons. LDoN just adds more content for that.

I'm actually trying to level SLOWLY so that I can do more of the game content before I'm too high level for there to be any risk.

My biggest problem is finding other players of my level range (25ish) who want to do the same thing who are not just part-time twink alts focused solely on powerleveling in paludal caverns. On prexus the sub-55 zones outside of Paludal can get kinda lonely.

It is simple. Do not buy the expansion, think of all the other areas that will be more open and less crowded for you to solo in.

"Do not buy the expansion, think of all the other areas that will be more open and less crowded for you to solo in."

Personally I think that druids are going to be one of the TOP classes for LDoN. Think about it. You have 6 slots to deal with whatever may be thrown at you (hopefully the dungeons are random and unmappable). Do you want a group of specialists?

Not me. Give me a Pally/SK, druid, cleric, necro, chanter and bard. This gives you just about every single ability you might need, short of 200+ lockpick. You get stacked slows and hastes, dual crowd control, rez, summon corpse, evac, lots of healers, lots of buffs and some decent DPS potential. Could be light on tanking, but you do get the bard, necro pet, and potential charms to assist there.

Quote: Do not buy the expansion, think of all the other areas that will be more open and less crowded for you to solo in.[/quote]
Sure just as soon as you tell me how to get the next Pure Blood spell w/o the expansion

LZ