when will they bring back the beastlords thread

February 31st folks. It's right around the corner. >_>

i have a gut feeling that you'll change your minds on not adding classes in a year or two. class balance is a trivial matter that will never happen, and should be considered as such. better to just accept that, and move on to what can be done.

Actually Beastlord pets were Warders, not Wardens

[p]My main in EQ is a beastlord. I love the class, I love the Vah Shir. But this game is not EQ. This plane of existance did not produce beastlords that I can find any evidence of. I could be wrong.[/p][p]Try a summoner if you want a pet. Not trying to be mean or argumentative. I would love a beastlord but the game developers/producers/creators don't want them in their game. People (non-beastlords) from EQ had a love-hate relationship with beastlords. They loved the buffs but they were very envious of the power of the beastlords. They (we) are very overpowered.[/p][p] Just my 2cp[/p][p] [/p]

[p] Totally agree 110% on every point made. bottom line: no need to introduce more classes into EQ2. There is a perfect balance already for what's available. adding more will simply add no new benefits to the game.[/p][p]There's enough broken atm as it is. No reason to make additional problems. Adding a new class will also involve rebalancing the rest which will lead to more bugs, unhappy players and ultimately more trouble then it was worth. Let the devs be so they can focus on the issues at hand rather then run off creating a new class that will need to be molded into the play system.[/p][p]/veto BL class[/p]

WardeRs, actually, not WardeNs. I loved my beastlord. But I don't see them coming into EQ2 anytime soon, alas.

[hr][p] [/p][p]meh. Yeah. I apparently have spent too much time away from EQ1 and too much time in EQ2. [/p][p]But, it the suggestion still stands. Warder was the lvl 50/55/60 Ranger title ... don't remember which. Either before Pathfinder or after .. I preferred the Huntress, myself. [/p][p]Then they came out with the crap quasi-hybrid Beastlords and I swear Brenlo gave a nod to the name of their pet as revenge for all the bashings Rangers gave him. [/p][p]So, it's only fair in EQ2 that Rangers should get a Beastlord as a pet! *evil gleam*[/p]

How about instead of an all new beastlord class they simply make a beastlord AA line for fury's? Much like the Inquisitors battle line, which changes the inquisitor form a stand back healer/crap nuke'er to a fair melee dps class/healer (thoug it does give some wardrobe problems since str suddenly becomes much more important) But anyways, in the next expantion ad another AA tree and let one of the lines in that tree be all about turning a fury into a beastlord. Then the fury can take it and become a beastlord or leave it and pick another line.

Isn't there already a similar aa-line for wardens where they can charm animals and use them as pets? Beyond that similarity, you have to REALLY becareful about what abilities you start giving classes so as not to encroach upon the PRIMARY abilities of other classes. You start letting wardens and furies use shamantic skills of debuffs, etc... you will have verily ticked off shamantic types adding YOUR name to their "Do not buff or heal this person list".

I liked playing my beastlord in EQ1, so perhaps if people want to play a beastlord they should go back to EQ1. As for seeing Luclin return in an expansion I doubt that, they'd have to figure out a way of putting a moon back together and even with magic that would be difficult, they don't have all the pieces anymore. Now there is another moon orbiting Norrath so if we go back to the moons it will be one that wasn't blown up.

[p]<wishes i could rename this thread When will they stop makeing "bring back the beastlords thread"> Because its not going to happen. Soe has said no more classes and there are class balance issues as it is. Like some one else said if they brough in a new class it would throw all classes out of balance and theyd have to rework everything over agian. And even if you got your coveted Beastlord class. You will be disapointed with it. It wont be nearly as powerfull as it was in EQ1 even though we can all pick our final classes now the classes were based on an archtype and the beatlord class doesnt really fit in with any of thoes base archtypes. Thease threads about beastlord have been getting old and was disapointed to see that it was one of the first things to be posted after the revamp. Please drop it and post about more intresting things. [/p][p]I would however like to see Luclin come back or at least parts of it. It could be creatively done. The nexus was from what i understood to be like the central "hub" of the combine spires. With the combine spires not activated for porting i wonder if some activity has gone on the moon. The way I invison porting to work was that the nexus was like the satilite that would recive the people porting and redirect them down to the desination. Kinda like a video signal being sent around the world. It would be very intresting seeing an expation dealing with the magic of the combine and about Luclin or what ever is left with it. People keep saying the next expation will deal with how much something has changed. Well yes odus has changed with the magic that changed the Erudites. Antonica changed with the underfoot colapsing under it. Faydwer has changed from masive wars. But what has changed the most Luclin i mean what can be more of a change then it haveing exploded with masive chunks still hanging near each other. [/p]

TheFangs wrote:

I really think that will be the ultimate answer to more classes. To add more AA trees in the future to more specialize. Give wardens more swarm pets or more melee attacks, give furies a permanent pet (like booboo from eq1, but not totally suck) with buffs, or give them a more wizard lines. Conj could get pet draw lines, which give them a pet buff that essentially Draws the damage potential of the pet into the conjurer (thus killing the pet) giving them high hitting nukes and dots for a limited time (just like the Fury ability that reduces heals in exchange for higher damage) which could be an end line, with more spell enhancements for the conjurer along the way, or a reverse, Giving the conjurer more buffs for their pets and ending in an ability that gives the conjurer a temporary mirror pet, which doubles the current pet, and all of its abilities for a short duration, say 30s, or 1min. These suggestions further focus the classes and give them a more tailored play style and almost creates new classes. Hell if you really want to go into a creative angle, if a summoner merges their scout pet they gain 2 abilities that will create 2 ice daggers (or katana if M1), or an earth sword and shield if they merge with their tank pet. Of course the necros would be poison and disease based, Thus creating "battle mages". You could do the same thing with Wizards and warlocks, giving them melee attacks along the hand 2 hand lines, sorta making them elemental and noxious based monks.

The possibilities are endless, its not adding in any new classes, but its allowing players to choose different ways to play their class.

[p] Monk (kinda)[/p][p]Brigand [/p][p]No Need for others[/p]

ke'la wrote:

[p] Assassins[/p]

The statement that new classes will not be added until ballance is achieved in the current classes is just the same as saying they will NEVER add new classes, since ballance will never be achieved. Ballance is the much desired mirage which is always visible from a distance but never seen up close, it is the shadow of a gnat, and the honesty of a senator. Ballance does not exist, hence if that is what is being waited on then it is going to be a looooooong wait.:x The precise measure of a classes usefullness is the variety and the different qualities it adds to the user's experience. A wizard is never going to go toe-to-toe with a guardian and survive, but the guardian better watch out at a distance. There are archetypes that have been neglected or poorly comingled with the current classes. Tool using classes are an example. Why can't a gnome equip a blunderbuss and go a huntin', ala Elmer Fudd? Why can a mage focus on utilitarian magic such as levitation, teleportation, scrying, and phasing? Why can't a palidin recruit some NPC members to go on a holy crusade? Why can't real thieves exist that can actually pick locks, find traps, lift purses, and scale walls, WITHOUT getting caught? They fact that the first winged race can't actually fly, says more about poor planning than it does about ballance. If Halo and friends can manage to create geometry encapsulating flight, then it seems a little ineffectual to claim that flight is impossible, and for everyone to believe them because, "the developers say it is so". Pardon me if I am just a little sceptical about the whole no fly zone. Honestly, how is a little fae, flying around EVER going to have an advantage over an ogre with a crossbow? Fea: Look at me, I am so cute when I fly.... snappp, yiieeeee, thump! Ogre: And crunchy too! Ballance is not a legitimate excuse for getting something done, and will NEVER be, not at least until you come up with a turing complete model of the gaming universe, which is not likely to happen as long as Johnny 14 year old plays on his daddy's account. I

ChildofHate wrote:

When I said the line should go to fury's I pretty much picked the class out of a hat, so your arguments are kind of missing the point
even thoug the one about shamans is a good one.

It's not like I'm a fury so it's not really important to me which class get the line. (should there be one) So give the line to one of the shaman classes instead. The original beastlord was a monk/shaman hybrid with pet after all, so I guess that would make more sense.

They really need to discover the part of the moon of Luclin spalshed down in the sea and is an island with SharVahl on it. And of course the Vah Shir ( who are much better looking than the Kerra) and their beastlords.
Beastlords were the best class in EQ1 until SOE started nerfing them. But I do miss my level 71 Beastlord.

The game had too many classes at launch. The cut and paste good/bad and defense/offense didn't work out. The radical changes the game has seen proved that. The beastlord being a god mode or overpowered class is a stupid Lake of Ill Omen newbie argument. That being said it seems pretty clear that AA is how they are shaping classes into a more unique mold. If it were up to me I would give Wardens a scout pet and serious pet AA. The way AA works they would have to give up some serious things for it but most other classes have very hard AA choices because of caps.

Are you ******* kidding me? SUMMONERS didn't even get great AAs for pets. Why the **** should an already set or above balanced class get extra? Yeah, you're right, completely remove ALL unique sides of this game, give ******* healers a DPS pet, with AAs that pet classes don't even get.

[p]Has the OP been well & fully taunted & pelted with rubbish & rotten fruit for asking this question?[/p][p]If not ....[/p][p]/target OP[/p][p]/taunt[/p][p]/pelt[/p][p]Just say NO to the return of EQ1 beastlords.[/p]