There can only be one? EQ1 and EQ2

[jpark]

I do have a lot of trouble understanding how it is seriously expected these two products can co-exist.  I am aware of the SOE message - different market segments and so on, but I believe this is said out of necessity, and masks the underlying business case.

I don't deny that EQ2 is different in some ways from EQ1.  However, I see this as the intended evolution of EQ to capture a wider audience, not a serious effort to differentiate and support two MMORPGs.

SOE objective is to migrate players from EQ to EQ2, they know it is not in their best interests to try and support two products, imo.

Prediction:  Over time SOE will offer more incentives to encourage players to move from EQ to EQ2.

Correct me if I am wrong, but things I have noticed so far are:

1.  Name legacy.  Keep your name from EQ to use in EQ2.
2.  Heirlooms.  Still undefined, but some sort of twinking in EQ2 reflecting your accomplishments with your character in EQ.
3.  Cross over zones.  Zones where EQ and EQ2 players can interact (powerleveling anyone?).

I expect this to go further - with more concessions over time, recognizing EQ characters that have developed tradeskills or have their Epics, which will be translated into a benefit for EQ2.

This is a prediction post.  I am not trying argue what SOE's motive is, I am arguing that IF my view of their motive is correct, that this is the kind of thing we should expect over time.

[ahoythematey]

That may be the master plan at SOE, but I suspect they'll keep EQ1 live well into the years until it's player numbers have dwindled to the point that they don't need more than one server, upon which everyone left is told to shut the fuck up about the lack of support and migrate to the remaining world or upgrade to EQ2.

[Furiously]

I suspect it will be a migration to EQ4 at that point.

[kaid]

sheesh if they crank out an expansion or two a year for eqlive they can keep it going for many years to come. Look at fricking UO they are still limping around after all this time by adding in ninjas.

The uber huge raid is an experiance from eqlive that you simply cannot have in eq2. People computers simply could not handle that much on screen action without blowing a gasket. For people who like gigantic zerg raids with 75 of your closest friends eqlive will be about as good as it gets for a long time to come.


Kaid

[NewGuy]

The uber huge raid is an experiance from eqlive that you simply cannot have in eq2. People computers simply could not handle that much on screen action without blowing a gasket.

Not now perhaps. But in two years? Probably.

Edit: On the other hand, EQ has never been about cutting edge graphics and the usual EQ player probably doesn't upgrade as often as the typical FPS player, so maybe you are right.

[jpark]

The uber huge raid is an experiance from eqlive that you simply cannot have in eq2. People computers simply could not handle that much on screen action without blowing a gasket. For people who like gigantic zerg raids with 75 of your closest friends eqlive will be about as good as it gets for a long time to come.Kaid

I think you have a great point here:  one of the reasons for believing that EQ2 is a more 'intimate" experience than EQ1 is that the graphics simply would not permit the zerg participation you describe.  Good insight.

However, you appear to believe that there are two segments of players, one of which wants huge zerg raids.  I don't believe this is the case.  I suspect that many of these players are attracted to elitism/tough raids etc. but if they can have that without zerging - they would like that as well if not more.  

In my limited experience, and I may be wrong, many uber guilds (on my old server) saw zerging on raids indicative of poor game design that was an outcome of trying to reach for the high end.  You can have elite / uber/ coveted raids without requiring bodies to make it so.  If anything, zergin ruins the high end, since such content becomes accessible to the uncoordinated and uskilled guilds that compensate with bodies.

We can agree to disagree on this point - so let's look at my predictions.  I listed above the concessions I see so far to encourage player switching, and I certainly expect to see more.  If we see more concessions....

[kaid]

Hard to say really I do know some who really like the gigantic whopping zerg experiance. Myself I would much rather have a raid that required alot of skill where I was one of 24 folks if only so that you actually feel like you are doing something.

I can't really speak for the uber mentality as huge raids where you can /follow for teh win never appealed to me.

Kaid

[kaid]

Also eventually you will likely see more migration but alot more folks will be able to run eqlive at a speed they can enjoy than they could eq2 probably for at least a couple more years.

I would agree eventually you likely will see more and more incentives for folks to move over to eq2 but mmrpg players are odd ducks as shown by UO players. Once people find a game and invest years of their lives into a character they tend not to move unless their current game is poking them in the eyes with hot iron rods while peeing on them.

kaid

[Threash]

From what i remember from my days of EQ doing things with LESS was always a matter of pride and a thing to brag about.  Killing a huge mob with 75 was never much of an accomplishment, doing it with 24 at 4am with 3 clerics and a half asleep skeleton crew on the other hand was a huge accomplishment.

[jpark]

I would agree eventually you likely will see more and more incentives for folks to move over to eq2 but mmrpg players are odd ducks as shown by UO players. kaid

You may be right about mmrpgs players.  But I am talking about SOE intentions, not whether or not it is the right strategy :)

Once people find a game and invest years of their lives into a character they tend not to move unless their current game is poking them in the eyes with hot iron rods while peeing on them.
kaid

Business 101 - switching costs :)  I agree, big problem.  What do you do?  Give folks recognition of the time sunk in into EQ (name legacy, heirlooms) in encouraging them to start EQ2.  Expect more concessions to reduce the switching costs for uber players with much to lose by moving.

[Morfiend]

I can't really speak for the uber mentality as huge raids where you can /follow for teh win never appealed to me.

Darkness Falls for teh win

[Trippy]

I can't really speak for the uber mentality as huge raids where you can /follow for teh win never appealed to me.

Heh that brings back memories. My main was a bard but I had a cleric, which were usually in short supply during raids, among my many alts so I would often just leave my bard on /follow with bard crack playing and play my cleric as part of our CH rotation.

[kaid]

I  have a friend who plays a mage in an uberguild and there are days he /follows somebody and plays his xbox or coh on his other system. In 70 odd people nobody can even tell if you are doing anything.

Clerics and warriors have to pay attention for most of the others a small gerbil could randomly hit the buttons needed.

kaid

[Alkiera]

Also eventually you will likely see more migration but alot more folks will be able to run eqlive at a speed they can enjoy than they could eq2 probably for at least a couple more years.

kaid

Still, the myth continues, that having a better computer will cause EQ to 'run faster'....

EQ benchmarks your machine on startup, and apparently sets up some kind of timing loop, so that your framerate stays in a given range... since a lot of things are based on your framerate, like your runspeed.  If your machine is chugging on something when you start up EQ, and it finishes after you've loaded, EQ runs incredibly well.  I knew someone who underclocked their machine with a software tool, and set it back to normal, so they could get better framerates during raids.

In short, If you could run EQ on some sort of supermachine, it'll still run crappy under many situations.

--
Alkiera

[Numtini]

I think the key to keeping EQ1 alive as a separate product is to stop updating the engine. They need to keep it as low tech as possible and I'm not sure they haven't gone too far for their best interests already.

UO has an amazing number of players who play in 2d because they have to, because they have no 3d card or something that's 3d in name only. Same is true for Lineage. (Or in Lineage's case because they have a Mac.) EQ could position itself into that market, do some minimal upgrades and cruise for quite a while.

But I think most players in EQ1 are ready to move to EQ2 or some other game. I've always blipped in and out of games, come back to EQ and all my friends are there. In the last six months a lot of those people have left and many of them have left for no game at all until EQ2 or WOW comes out.

[Merusk]

I think the key to keeping EQ1 alive as a separate product is to stop updating the engine. They need to keep it as low tech as possible and I'm not sure they haven't gone too far for their best interests already.

UO has an amazing number of players who play in 2d because they have to, because they have no 3d card or something that's 3d in name only. Same is true for Lineage. (Or in Lineage's case because they have a Mac.) EQ could position itself into that market, do some minimal upgrades and cruise for quite a while.

But I think most players in EQ1 are ready to move to EQ2 or some other game. I've always blipped in and out of games, come back to EQ and all my friends are there. In the last six months a lot of those people have left and many of them have left for no game at all until EQ2 or WOW comes out.

There are a large number ready to move on.  However, I'm still surprised by the large number who say they're not going anywhere.  They're not "gamers" but they're Hardcore EQ players, though. I'd put them on the level of addicts since, in all instances of the people I'm speaking of, they have at *least* 3 accounts which they run at all times.

  Dualboxing? Ha, amatures! The husband-wife duos fill out COMPLETE GROUPS by themselves.  Shit it makes me ill.  One couple in particular just "dinged" 400+ AAs on "alt" characters yesterday when I was on.  (Sidenote: they've got to be independently wealthy, or in danger of losing their apartment. They're on before I get home from work, and don't log off until after 11 or 12.)

However, this is what EQ is becoming.   More and more I realize *I'M* the odball in the game because I don't have multiple accounts with multiple characters at 65 & a bunch of AAs.  They *like* that you need a holy trinity to complete content. Something that, while EQ2 doesn't promise to fix, it promises to mitigate through the archtype system. This is definatly not the market they're designing EQ2 for.

As far as the 'migration' stuff,  I haven't heard anything about that recently. The cross-over zones were never actualy 'cross over zones' but were supposed to be more along the lines of "If your account in EQ has access to zone xyz, so will your EQ2 account." But there's no mention of that feature in the FAQ anymore, so it might have been dropped.   They've kept a lot of the heirloom system in the dark, aside from metnioning it in the basic FAQ. I wonder if it won't just simply be "if you did so-and-so in EQ, you get a nifty trinket for your EQ2 apartment." (Like the pet dragon & Antonica/Lucian statue from the collector's edition.)

[jpark]

Merusk wrote,

They *like* that you need a holy trinity to complete content. Something that, while EQ2 doesn't promise to fix, it promises to mitigate through the archtype system. This is definatly not the market they're designing EQ2 for.

Merusk perhaps I am missing something, but if you look at their archetype line-up, I had thought they had been reasonably clear:  tank, mage, priest, scout (or whatever its called).   They have moved from Trinity to Quadrology.

They have expanded the Trinity by making the role of the Rogue far more relevant (rogue, assassin, ranger etc) to group function, unlike in EQ.

[Alluvian]

To me, saying EQ1 can't exist with EQ2 in existance is like saying EQ1 can't exist with DAOC in existance.  Both those statements are ridiculous.

Someone made a statement that Kaid was under the impression that there were two types of folk, those who liked huge raids and those who didn't.  I would like to suggest that the two groups are more like: "Those who are willing to start all over", and "Those who are not".  There are a lot of EQ1 players in that second category.  And no, rolling an alt is not starting over by any means.

Plus, SOE will still be offering it's gold pass or whatever they call it (all access?).  It really looks like they are wanting to build this gold pass as much as possible.  One reason is probably that it will let them keep less than successful games like planetside alive.  I gauruntee once eq2 comes out I am going on the gold pass for at least a month or two.

[Sky]

I would like to suggest that the two groups are more like: "Those who are willing to start all over", and "Those who are not".

Good point, I know a few people who still play EQ, even after my tour of several other games, because they've "invested" so much into EQ.

I guess that ridiculous treadmill works, eh?

[UD_Delt]

I've recently found myself back in EQ. My Dad reupped his account and I would play on there once in a while and ended up getting back in the groove so I have now resubbed my own account.

Unfortunately I shared the old man's account for so long that's where my higher level chars are and I'm waayyyy too cheap to pay to have them transferred.

Then again I find it fun to start over so that's what I'm doing. EQ is actually pretty fun now that it's so easy to twink a new char and you can solo when needed with any char to at least level 30.

[HaemishM]

Plus, SOE will still be offering it's gold pass or whatever they call it (all access?).  It really looks like they are wanting to build this gold pass as much as possible.  One reason is probably that it will let them keep less than successful games like planetside alive.  I gauruntee once eq2 comes out I am going on the gold pass for at least a month or two.

Not to mention the gold pass with multiple games on the pass allows them to obfuscate the numbers of subscribers on ALL their games even more than they already do.

[jpark]

To me, saying EQ1 can't exist with EQ2 in existance is like saying EQ1 can't exist with DAOC in existance.  Both those statements are ridiculous.

Okay Alluvian - it seems you would predict that SOE will not offer any more concessions / incentives for current players of EQ to switch to EQ2?

Let's talk about the future.  What do you predict based on your stated view?

With respect to your comment - I suggest looking at a different way:  if the same company owned both EQ and DaOC - would you expect continued support for both products over time?

[Trippy]

Merusk wrote,

They *like* that you need a holy trinity to complete content. Something that, while EQ2 doesn't promise to fix, it promises to mitigate through the archtype system. This is definatly not the market they're designing EQ2 for.

Merusk perhaps I am missing something, but if you look at their archetype line-up, I had thought they had been reasonably clear:  tank, mage, priest, scout (or whatever its called).   They have moved from Trinity to Quadrology.

They have expanded the Trinity by making the role of the Rogue far more relevant (rogue, assassin, ranger etc) to group function, unlike in EQ.

Back in my EQ days (pre-PoP) the Holy Trinity was specifically Warrior, Cleric, Enchanter. Those were the classes your average player thought you had to have to have a good group. Those players who actually took the time to learn how combat and classes worked knew that was a bunch of hooey but it was still difficult for many classes to find a group even though when played well they were actually as good or better than the above 3 classes at filling those roles (Warriors in particular despite popular perception were actually sub-par tanks for single group exp grinds).

Experienced EQ players saw things more in terms roles (tank, healer, crowd control, expeditor, DPS) rather than just those 3 classes thereby vastly expanding the number of "viable" class combinations in a group and this is something the devs have codified in EQ2 with its archetypes which in theory should make it easier for the masses to mix and match classes to fill out a "balanced" group. Yes they've added some new mechanics to EQ2 by making the Scout archetype the only ones that can initiate the "combat wheel" but I see that more as an extension of the expeditor/efficiency expert role in EQ though obviously we don't have much detail about how that works right now.

[WayAbvPar]

Back in my EQ days (pre-PoP) the Holy Trinity was specifically Warrior, Cleric, Enchanter. Those were the classes your average player thought you had to have to have a good group.

I have often heard this line of thinking. I wonder how true it is, for 2 reasons- A) I actually had trouble finding a group as an enchanter some days, and B) I usually spent the first half hour with a group instructing them on how to work with an enchanter. If the average player knew the value of an enchanter, why the FUCK did they keep breaking my mezzes?

Not that I am bitter.

[jpark]

Yes they've added some new mechanics to EQ2 by making the Scout archetype the only ones that can initiate the "combat wheel" but I see that more as an extension of the expeditor/efficiency expert role in EQ though obviously we don't have much detail about how that works right now.

... yup, but the point is, and it sounds like we agree, that the grouping dynamics - Trinity, Quadrology etc. of EQ2 currently sounds similar to EQ1.  No paradigm shift in the making.  Whatever EQ2 has in store here, is bound (hoped imo) to appeal to veterens of EQ without precluding newbies.

If the average player knew the value of an enchanter, why the FUCK did they keep breaking my mezzes?

(That's why the CoH incarnation of the enchanter is so compelling.  If you're an ice controller - party members can see who is held by virtue of a block of ice.)

[Trippy]

Back in my EQ days (pre-PoP) the Holy Trinity was specifically Warrior, Cleric, Enchanter. Those were the classes your average player thought you had to have to have a good group.

I have often heard this line of thinking. I wonder how true it is, for 2 reasons- A) I actually had trouble finding a group as an enchanter some days,

That's cause you only need one Enchanter in a group. Once that quota is filled (i.e. all groups that want an Enchanter have one) the rest are kind of screwed.

and B) I usually spent the first half hour with a group instructing them on how to work with an enchanter. If the average player knew the value of an enchanter, why the FUCK did they keep breaking my mezzes?

Not that I am bitter.

Root is your friend. But seriously I totally symphatize with you having had a Bard as a main and an Enchanter as one of my alts (yes I was a control freak in the game). Many players had a disturbing lack of basic combat knowledge. "Hey <level 50+ melee class>, did you know you do more damage if you attack from behind?" "Really?" Grrrr.

[Sky]

If you're an ice controller - party members can see who is held by virtue of a block of ice.

Yes, the visual representations are so much nicer than the old style. I don't know why, but I always got a chuckle out of the sleep animation + particle of "ZzZZz". I hope all new games pick up on that improvement.

As far as the UNholy trinity discussion, my buddy the eqholic played a wizard, and I was a necro. We did great as a tag-team, with 'the boy' (my pet) tanking, especially in places like lower guk. One reason we had a lot of fun is that we really didn't need other classes to be effective, so I could employ my rule of 'anyone who isn't a dick can join up', rather than spamming "(class x) needed in Sage room!"

My favorite regular group mix is still the 5 wizard (plus the occasional necro) group when I played a wizard. The damage output was sick.

[shiznitz]

I quit EQ (in the spring) due to the time requirements of raiding. EQ2 says the time requirements will be less. I will buy the game on release hoping it is true. The designers of that franchise are simply the best world builders in the MMOG business and I want to see what they can do in v2. More importantly, my EQ guild largely migrated to CoH and I imagine most of us will migrate again to EQ2.

[Alluvian]

To me, saying EQ1 can't exist with EQ2 in existance is like saying EQ1 can't exist with DAOC in existance.  Both those statements are ridiculous.

Okay Alluvian - it seems you would predict that SOE will not offer any more concessions / incentives for current players of EQ to switch to EQ2?

Let's talk about the future.  What do you predict based on your stated view?

With respect to your comment - I suggest looking at a different way:  if the same company owned both EQ and DaOC - would you expect continued support for both products over time?

No, SOE will not make any incentives for players to switch to EQ2.  That would frankly be stupid of them and they have already said their goal is to offer incentives for people to play BOTH games concurrently.  That is where the money is.  The form this incentive comes in was supposed to be the heirlooms and such, but I have not heard much about them in a long time.  The initial idea was if you had the item in EQ1 on an active account you had it in EQ2 (although it's function may be different).  The most recent snippet I hear about these items was that they may not be tied to EQ1 anymore.

But there is little financial incentive to SOE to have a player MOVE from one of their games to another.  They will want them to sub to BOTH or sub to the Gold pass and make more monthly off that player than either game would be on it's own.

I am curious if EQ2 will have any of those incentives left at launch or not.  Either way, the incentives could still trickle in easily enough post launch.

[Merusk]

Was stuck in a meeting all day, and had lunch with the office so I didn't get a chance to respond until now. Trippy pretty much summed up my thinking, though.  Thanks, Trip.

Yes they've added some new mechanics to EQ2 by making the Scout archetype the only ones that can initiate the "combat wheel" but I see that more as an extension of the expeditor/efficiency expert role in EQ though obviously we don't have much detail about how that works right now.

... yup, but the point is, and it sounds like we agree, that the grouping dynamics - Trinity, Quadrology etc. of EQ2 currently sounds similar to EQ1.  No paradigm shift in the making.  Whatever EQ2 has in store here, is bound (hoped imo) to appeal to veterens of EQ without precluding newbies.

You're right, they're not revamping MMO combat in any way shape or form.  The holy trinity I see is "Tank, Heal, Utility". All mmos follow this path because too many devs have witnessed EQ's long-term success, and it's what too many players have been weaned on.  Until someone is willing to take a risk and try to break this paradigm and manages to create a successful game, it's what level-based MMO combat will be with few exclusions.

It has its roots in MUDs which have their roots in D&D with it's class-based, "This class has these abliities, and these abilities alone are done by this class," mindset.

Now, what EQ2 *IS* doing (or at least claiming to do) is breaking down those abilities into Archtypes, and then making sure each individualized class is able to fill that role equaly well in all situations. Where in EQ1 you couldn't have a Paladin or Shadowknight tank an ubermob on a raid, and you can't have  druids as your main raid healers, the designers have stated that goal is to allow for all that in EQ2.  So long as you have a base group of the four archtypes you should be ok to do most things. (Outside of raids, where you'd need more people but not be saying "Well we've got 3 shaman 4 druids and a cleric, we can't do shit tonight," like you have to in EQ1.)

If the average player knew the value of an enchanter, why the FUCK did they keep breaking my mezzes?

(That's why the CoH incarnation of the enchanter is so compelling.  If you're an ice controller - party members can see who is held by virtue of a block of ice.)[/quote]

What level did you finally get to Way? If it was only the 30s, then folks were only just starting to learn what a 'chanter was for. In my experience it was mainly because, as you alluded to, the chanters finally ate enough deaths they got bossy enough to say "Look, you idiots, it works like this.."  When I got into the 40s, anyone who broke mezzes more than once or twice (and in situations that could legitimatly be called accidents) got the boot or managed to break the group up becuase the 'chanter left.


Edit to add:
- Also, one of the key things to remember when discussing EQ2 is who it's being aimed at.  Those EQ players who played and enjoyed EQ but left because of time requirements, or had problems with SOME of the fundamental flaws in the game's original path to its current state. (like the raid holy-trinity.)  If you never enjoyed EQ on any level, you won't enjoy EQ2, simple fact.  If you enjoy only large uberguild raids that take multiple hours and 50+ people (And yes, some are just designed to use that many people, like the Rathe Council or the Emperorer of SSra.) then you also wouldn't enjoy EQ2, as the design is being described,  since they're not trying to clone their own game.

Automakers sell more than one style of car in the same body type (SUV/ Sedan/ Coupe). Look at it like that if you keep having trouble wrapping your head around the "EQ != EQ2 with pretty graphics" concept.  The question is can they pull it off well enough that people WILL look beyond the name.  With the reaction of most people being "Oh, EQ, it must be like 'XYZ'" they have their work cut out for them.

[WayAbvPar]

What level did you finally get to Way? If it was only the 30s, then folks were only just starting to learn what a 'chanter was for. In my experience it was mainly because, as you alluded to, the chanters finally ate enough deaths they got bossy enough to say "Look, you idiots, it works like this.." When I got into the 40s, anyone who broke mezzes more than once or twice (and in situations that could legitimatly be called accidents) got the boot or managed to break the group up becuase the 'chanter left.

I didn't even get that far- I want to say I got to 28th level. What level was the mana regen spell (the upgrade to Breeze)? I was like a half-level from getting it when I cancelled.

Even at my relatively young character age, I got bossy in a hurry, and left a couple of groups after getting killed due to the utter incompetence of others. It was still one of my favorite MMOG characters to play; I just got started much later than everyone else and so was without a regular play group. Eventually I realized that with my sporadic play schedule and my tendency to get sidetracked by other games for days at a time, I would continue to fall behind the curve. I coulda been one of the greats, but I apparently lack the catass gene.

[Alkiera]

What level did you finally get to Way? If it was only the 30s, then folks were only just starting to learn what a 'chanter was for. In my experience it was mainly because, as you alluded to, the chanters finally ate enough deaths they got bossy enough to say "Look, you idiots, it works like this.." When I got into the 40s, anyone who broke mezzes more than once or twice (and in situations that could legitimatly be called accidents) got the boot or managed to break the group up becuase the 'chanter left.

I didn't even get that far- I want to say I got to 28th level. What level was the mana regen spell (the upgrade to Breeze)? I was like a half-level from getting it when I cancelled.

Even at my relatively young character age, I got bossy in a hurry, and left a couple of groups after getting killed due to the utter incompetence of others. It was still one of my favorite MMOG characters to play; I just got started much later than everyone else and so was without a regular play group. Eventually I realized that with my sporadic play schedule and my tendency to get sidetracked by other games for days at a time, I would continue to fall behind the curve. I coulda been one of the greats, but I apparently lack the catass gene.

Aye, Clarity is 29.  If it helps, due to people running thru the n00b highway of outdoor zones with easy single pulling, I frequently had to give those same basic instructions to people in their 50's... and sometimes 60's.  I had the advantage of having RL friends who played a ranger, warrior, wizard, and cleric; cleric was the roommate who got me into the game.  That and I started 6 months after release.  Being able to talk in realtime about what was going on in the group gave us a level of synergy that freaked people out.  There're still things that I'll do with Kand as cleric that I won't do with any other cleric, even tho we no longer room together, because I trust him to hold me together while I do insane things.  We did alot of charm duo-ing in weird areas in the 60's.

--
Alkiera

[Alluvian]

Towards the end of my active EQ playing time (maybe a year ago) the holy trinity was much more vague.

Our guild had a pally for a tank, not a warrior, we never had an enchanter bard or necro.  We exclusively used pacify (cast by the cleric through the paladin pulling, pacify had no range or line of sight requirements) and root parking (my job as the ranger) as our crowd control.

It was tons more fun than the few times we had an enchanter actually.  Now we are not talking uber stuff, but LDON dungeons of 60+ party level, the lower plains, and any pre POP nonboss-type mobs.

Outside where the pulling is easier we could easily drop the cleric for a druid and do fine (the cleric would then play her rogue and we also had a shaman, 2 secondary healers easily match cleric in a group)

Now realize the shaman was a key element.  The shaman slows are a HUGE bonus.  Drop the shaman and the paladin would probably have to be a warrior.  But it's just that the holy trinity was NEVER a REQUIREMENT to play the game.  I have played less than 10% of my time in EQ with the holy trinity present.  Far less than that actually.  Hell, up till nightmare when our paladin finally leveled up I was our primary guilld tank as a ranger.  And it worked fine.  When I was primary tanking the cleric or shaman would do root parking (whoever got the aggro on the add).

The only problem I had with the game was that once you got a group together that knew what the fuck to do, the process of killing was repetitive.  The same process was always followed.  Still was fun because things could go wrong.  But eventually everything that could go wrong DID go wrong and we had plans and contingincies for everything (including every man for himself run like hell of course).  So eventually even the fuckups became old hat.  And battles that would have once been improv and exciting became scripted.

EQ had really neat strategy for any groups outside the holy trinity.  The holy trinity was the worst way to play the game.  But so was camping.  And players just want to hear that fucking damnable ding.  The problem was that once your group became standard over months of play, that group BECAME like the holy trinity for those involved.  The tactics were more decided by the makeup of the group than the monsters you were fighting with the only exception being who you kill first in a group.

[Merusk]

EQ had really neat strategy for any groups outside the holy trinity.  The holy trinity was the worst way to play the game.  But so was camping.  And players just want to hear that fucking damnable ding.  The problem was that once your group became standard over months of play, that group BECAME like the holy trinity for those involved.  The tactics were more decided by the makeup of the group than the monsters you were fighting with the only exception being who you kill first in a group.

I agree, and regularly don't use the 'trinity' for those exact encounters you're talking about taking on.  I'm a druid and usually main healer in all groups I'm involved with, from LDONs to some low-end named mobs.  Hell, one of the best groups I was ever in was a shadowknight, 3 rogues, a beastlord and me. We tore shit up! However, if you ever get into raiding, that's where the trinity needs to be used.

The maliaise you're describing about things getting repetative is probably true of any game.  If you play it enough you burn out because you know what's going to happen, and it just gets repetative.  Outside of a PvP experience, I don't believe there's any way to cure that.  Happens with all games, and when it does I usually just move on for a while and come back later.

[Alkiera]

The maliaise you're describing about things getting repetative is probably true of any game. If you play it enough you burn out because you know what's going to happen, and it just gets repetative. Outside of a PvP experience, I don't believe there's any way to cure that. Happens with all games, and when it does I usually just move on for a while and come back later.

Yes, but.  EQ mobs are the most ridiculously monotonous group of things, outside of the uber boss mobs.  Every mobs is a variant of warrior, including warrior who can backstab, warrior who can cast nukes or enchanter spells, and warrior who can heal.  They all follow the same basic AI, with minor exceptions if they can cast spells...  that being rush the player and melee him to death with insane damage.  Heck, Diablo 2 has more variations in mob AI.  Ranged mobs in NWN will at least attempt to kite you.  CoH minions all act more intelligent than EQ mobs, and LTs and bosses are far and away better than your average EQ mob.

--
Alkiera