EQ3/EQ Next ~ The Ideas Thread

ProteinPlus3 wrote:

UI with customizability on par with World of Warcraft's please and thank you.

ProteinPlus3 wrote:

Video shoinked by SOE.
Not surprising.

I want a game without classes and levels.
You pick a race and you start the game.
Every action you do in the game results in you gaining in a skill.
Swing a sword, gain strength, agility, thrust, etc.
Shoot a bow, gain strenth, agility, aim, etc.
Cast a fire spell, gain intelligence, pyromagic, dexterity, etc.
The higher your skills, the more effective you are using an item that builds those skills.
99% of the items in the game can be used by any player at any time. However, you may be very inefficient in using that item. A new player with low skills might miss every time they swing the Super Fabled Uber Sword, a nicely skilled player might miss half the time they swing, when they do hit there would be a large range in damage. A highly skilled player would hit nearly every time and do near max damage each time.
No levels. No classes.
If you pick up a sword your first day and decide to be a melee fighter you can. You'll build those skills which in turn will make you more efficient in using those weapons.
However, if one day you decide that you want to cast a magic spell you can do that too. You'll go find a wand, learn a basic spell, and start casting away. You'll build up different skills.
Over time, you'll see very uniquely skilled characters.
The model moves from being level based to being skilled based with skills enhancing how well you use an item.
Not all skills will be available right away. Skills will become unlocked as you progress. Some skills will unlock based on how high several skills are. Swing a sword long enough and your melee, strength, and agility will be high enough that you'll unlock 'Martial Arts.'
That's the skill system I want. I won't take any more time to go into the quest system.

Gravy wrote:

So you basically want Skyrim

I would like to see the gamplay mechanics be like EQ 1 in the Kunark Era with some minor tweaks.
I would like to see a starting city for each race with its own " Newbie Yard " with lots of quests, some of which will require a group of 3 or more and a few that will need a full group that will send them out into the wilderness to get lost together. Just enough to grease the Social aspects of the game at the beginning.
Everquest has a feel to it when running, jumping, turning, stopping, etc. Keep it.
The more I type , Heck , Just make an updated version of EQ, base it on the time Before the original EQ, call it Old Norrath or something and advertise it for 6 months with lots of hype, make it free to play to level 20 with a few restrictions.
I will buy it and so will lots of other people.
I've been playing a form of EQ since 2000 , just give me my new drug please and make it soon.

Assuming basics like the game being made for PC and not needing something like Steam, etc., there are two features which, if either were included, I'd definitely pre-order. The first is the ability to play music like in Lotro, the second is diplomacy like in Vanguard.
Things that would also draw my attention would be something akin to the soul system in Rift, or the ability to play one of my own characters as a mercenary, such as in Guild Wars.
The one thing that would dissuade me from buying it would be not having a guild hall. Even if it's not as good as the one in EQ2, there needs to be a place to which we can recall, where we have some guild storage, and mostly which we can call "home". The main reason we never settled in Rift (despite all of us playing there regularly since beta) is that we feel like homeless orphans, just camping out next to the guild bank, as it's the nearest thing to a "communal anchor" that we have.

Thunndar316 wrote:

Ha!
I haven't played Skyrim yet, but I know about it. I didn't know anything about the gameplay when I wrote that.
I talked to a friend of my who is playing Skyrim and he said, 'Yeah, you know all that stuff you've always talked about in a MMO, well that's Skyrim. Just not the MMO.'
So yeah, I want Skyrim as a MMO.

Gratz Rothgar.

Achievement/Advancement points or skill points, if such a concept is carried forward, should be earned at a fixed rate. There is nothing 'alternate' or really elective about earning what we currently call AA, just deferred or not. The only thing that should be elective is how and perhaps when they are spent. They wouldn't have to be a hidden, bundled cost of a level (if the concept of levels is carried forward); instead, make it clear that the character is in training or discovery phase and level of their specialty, as opposed to a mastery phase where minimal skill points are earned per 'level'. In other words, the rate per level wouldnt have to be a flat rate, where each level you earn x and only x AA, but rather at level Q it might be x, and at P it might be y for every character. In this way, the power and relative ability of any level '50' will be comparatively the same as any level '50', in terms of potential ability, no matter who you encounter during your adventures. This leaves luck, quality of gear, and command of the character as the only variables.
Respecing should be a little different too. Skill and spell families should be something you have chosen to study, train in the field, and master through AI testing. They should be immutable to a large extent. Sometimes the reasons to respec are because of a specific tasks, playstyle changes, a more optimal or efficient 'general' or typical setup can be achieved (min/max), or sometimes because underlying mechanics change. I think each case warrants its own remedy.
While mirrors are nice for quick swaps of one setup to another, often times only a select few things really change (when the stored profile and the active profile are both adventuring setups, I move at most 2 dozen out of almost 27 dozen spent)... almost so little, I question whether it really should matter, even if it does. Even when I have one setup for tradeskilling, and one for adventuring, at most I'm moving 3 dozen instead of just 2. Further, I think the opportunity for immersion and an opportunity for player training in game are lost.
Task based respecs are for temporary purposes, thus the respec should be temporary, but perhaps at a reduced effectiveness, and a limit to the degree of which points can be moved around. To initiate and revert a task based respec, some sort of hurdle should be jumped through: preferably a test of skills against an apprpriate AI. Basically, I read the book, if I can show you I can do it, give me a chance to try it out.
Playstyle changes and min/maxing to the latest, 'best' setup should go through a different process. Perhaps something in-line with the betrayal style quests we are more familiar with in difficulty/duration in a general sense; but because we are changing our specific adventuring skills and spells, there should be more adventuring specific tasks to test adventuring readiness first in the old skills to ensure what we are about to unlearn and reapply were really mastered, and then again with the new skills, to ensure we have a grasp of what we are getting into.
Players would be more immersed if they didnt so often have to rely on outside sources to grasp the fundamentals of skills and stats. I am not saying reveal the exact numerics of a combat formula, but rather that there needs to be a better in-game method of revealing how things work; and how they often work best, to a degree.
Significant changes to mechanics; or even ones that are on the surface subtle but have a significant impact on a character calls for something a bit easier, but it doesnt have to be a complete clear and free reset. Use lore to write it off as an art or spell or ability that can never be used again in the manner it was taught... grave and dire consequences discovered.. blah, blah, blah.. and send them to a mastery trainer to learn a new technique, tactic, or magic trick in place of the old technique by 'a hand-written request of the master trainer himself.' Or something to that effect... skipping the testing of old technique obviously because it's gone and 'forbidden', but retain the readiness test with the new technique.

The next game that makes dungeons actual dungeons and not instances, or more specific dungeons like VANGUARDS is the next game I fall in love with and spend a loooooot of time in. Every game from WoW on has done nothing but instance this, instance that, instance this. Where the hell is the WORLD in these games anymore? There isnt any. Your in an instance disconnected from the worlds now... Sad what has happened to MMO's lately...

Bring back Vanguard and invest some money into that game or take from it and take what it did well and thats some maaaaaasssively sized and maaassively fun amazing dungeons to crawl through. And please for the love of god do NOT ever, I repeat, EVER make guild halls in a game ever again. EVER!, have I said ever? Ever! You killed any sense of population and any feeling of actually being in a game world with other players when you introduced those into EQ2... neat idea but wont work for that very reason. Cities are barren empty now since those went in and yet you guys are taking time, energy and resources to revamp 2 cities in the game? Is anyone actually thinking over there when creating these? Are you guys even playing the game and seeing what guild halls did to the cities? They are empty, Do not spend any time revamping the cities because no ones in them.

Thunndar316 wrote:

Sounds more like EVE or UO to me. Skyrim has levels and skill caps.
There are plenty of skill-based MUDs: no classes and no levels, players are free to learn and improve whichever skills they wish...without any limits. Besides time spent. Those who have played for a long time are seriously OP, but that's part of the charm of the genre.
I'd love to see an another fantasy MMO with UO skill-system. Too bad that most modern ones are stuck using level and class-based systems, afraid to try anything new. MMORPGs still haven't evolved past DikuMUDs...and I doubt that EQNext will change that.

It would be so totally coolies if we could purchase our skills through the Marketplace in EQ3!

Here's what I want.

Take the original EQ1 world with Antonica, Faydwer, Odus, Kunark, and Velious.

Now, keep the original zone layouts and go back with better graphics and whatever.

Go back to the original list of classes.

• Warrior
• Monk
• Pally
• SK
• Cleric
• Druid
• Shaman
• Mage
• Necro
• Wizard
• Bard
• Rogue
• Ranger
• Enchanter
• Beastlord (might as well they will never stop crying for it)
  

Take the size of raid forces down to 15 max. This will enable everyone (including small guilds) to try and beat end game content without joining or raising a small army. You alienate half your customers from a lot of content with large raid requirements. Difficult content does not have to equal larger numbers. Easy mode/hard mode fine, but shrink the raid size.
Raids should not require x# clerics and x# enchanters and x# bards and this type of tank. Stop alienating people.
Group sizes of 5. This makes one spot for each class, and much easier to balance than 24.
Each class should have special abilities that makes them useful.
Import the best aspects of EQ2 - housing, crafting, voice chat, shineys, instances.
Back to the spell books. Limit people to a certain number again so our screens don't look like a mess of icons anymore.
Make crowd control important again. This once great skill was ignored in EQ2.
Mobs should run away. Snares, roots were another great skill that was ignored.
Trains! - Bring em back.
Zoneless - Every non instance should be free of zoning. You still need instances though for raiding and grouping non contested.
Capming - I don't know about others but I kinda miss it. You can't get to know anyone dashing through an instance. I made tons of friends in EQ1 just sitting in a dungeon waiting for something to spawn every 20 minutes.
Death penalty - EQ1 was harsh, sometimes outright cruel. Still, I think players were better when they actually had to consider worrying about death. If you died while trying to kill Trakanon, then your corpse is still at his feet. You needed a Necro to summon it or a Rogue with great sneaking ability to drag it out for you. It made those classes highly appreciated, and that is missing in EQ2. We just hit revive and there's not even an experience penalty.
Travel - Give it back to the Wizards and Druids. Let classes bind and gate, maybe offer some some sort of horse or boat system, but insta clicking to every continent makes your world seem very small.

Just a few things I want in EQ Next. I could probably go on all day though.

Thunndar316 wrote:

I have to take issue with the logic of your post here. Using your logic of 1 class each in a raid their would be more tanks than healers in the raid allowing for only 1 healer per grp. Knowing the Beastlord had some limited heals that would require them in the MT grp forcing the pally to most likely help heal the SK and this would leave the monk in grp 3 on light duty for add pick up or step in duty as required. As the monk was not a true tank it did have some limited rolls where it would be required to do more than dps. A necro could provide limited ehals in eq1 too so that would force them inot a life transfer/pact situation also.
Any raid requiring only 3 main healers could not be designed to hit harder than allowing the limited healing your frame work would allow for. While a applaud you trying to find a roll for everyone a 15 man raid would just not be all that interesting.

Vlahkmaak@Nagafen wrote:

I agree!
The solution may be strategic combat: the dragon flies into the air, mages knock it down, but only when its wings are out of the way, etc.

There are many fascinating posts in this thread's 16 pages.

Vlahkmaak@Nagafen wrote:

Well, you would have three groups and one healer per group. What I am looking for is more flexibility in a classes abilities through AA's. I didn't mention this but I have a lot of ideas I didn't mention.
I just don't want the next MMO to be another round of we need x Clerics, and X Enchanters and X Bards or we can't raid. People should be able to play any class they want and become useful to raids.
When I left EQ2 we were using 8 healers, 4 enchanters and 4 bards per raid. That's 66% devoted to just healing and utility. Add 3 tanks and that's 79% of the raid force. I think it's lazy, uncreative and uninspiring. There are many things they could do to create difficulty other than more HP, more, DPS, more fail conditions. I just don't think the MMO can evolve until they simplify balance.
Balance is key. Everyone must be able to contribute. Every class must be important.

IMO of course, and I respect the opinions of others posting here.

Gravy wrote:

What you want is what Rift is almost like a jack of all trades class. Which is why I left Rift cause even though they have class, it feels like they don't have any. For instant: I played a healer class Justicar, when I joined a group did they let me play a healer NO they did not, the majority of the groups I joined I always was a DPS or worst the TANK in the group cause they said every class can do everything. I could not or never played the role I wanted to play a healer.
I want to put back in games Roles, If I rolled a healer that because I want to play a healer not what everybody else want me to play.
Maybe you should check out Rift or any other games that has a Jack of All Trades class.

Bring back specific roles.

Another thing I thought would be cool is if every raid had a "Raidmaster" He/she would oversee the raid from an overhead view and be the leader.
Call out strategy, collect loot to be distributed later, form up the groups and summon everyone to the zone, ect. They would not be playing a toon in the raid, just overseeing everything from a god like position.
It would be something different IMO

Also, built in tools. We should not have to rely on 3rd party programs like ACT in order to raid. The game should provide all the information you need in order to succeed without digging through a database. Visual and audio clues must be provided. Something bigger than a tiny little 1/4" square debuff icon.

Thunndar316 wrote:

No No No

I like everything you said except for Instances. I dont care what people say but Instances have been the bane of MMO's ever since they were introduced. They disconnect you from the game world. No No NO NO on instancing. If Vanguard can do dungeons successful then any game can, you just have to have some imagination.

1000Words wrote:

Raid gear, levels, and any alternate advancement need to be added to the marketplace list too! That would be so hawt!