I might skip Blackthorn --- because of all the crazy "balance ideas"
First of all, I am sorry that this reflection may be a bit long.
I've played classic freeshards like Uthgard 1&2, Origin, Phoenix, Atlas...etc., and I have high hopes for the upcoming Blackthorn.
Recently, I participated in the beta test, and I'd like to share Blackthorn's strengths and weaknesses in my opinion.
First, I must commend the developers; they've made the PvE process incredibly fun, making exploring areas a truly enjoyable experience.
Regional announcements inform you of nearby kill quests and even provide the current con and direction.
Nearby named mobs will also display directions.
Each Zone is divided into many smaller areas; exploring/unlocking each area grants exp.
After defeating a named mob in a group, a treasure chest sometimes spawns, offering extra rewards.
Porting are unlocked after reaching various towns, which is very convenient; buying a horse riding ticket no longer requires handing it to the merchant.
For standard quests, NPCs will always inform you of the rewards; simply use `/finish` to claim them upon completion.
Upgrading your trading skills will also grant you exp. The /craft UI for the trading skill is also very convenient, with features such as automatically purchasing missing materials and setting consecutive crafting attempts.
I think these changes greatly enhance the DAoC PvE experience, which is fantastic!
Next, I'll share why I think Blackthorn might be unbearable: the developers seem obsessed with their own "balance idea," unable to break free.
The reason lies in Dev's continuous changes to too many core gameplay elements of DAoC, including class design, style changes, and even the entire game mechanics.
- First, Dev claims it's a "Tweaked Classes based on patch 1.65 level" design.
However, if you open the Wiki, the style changes are so numerous they're unrecognizable.
Honestly, if Dev dislike patch 1.65 so much, why use that version?
The new style patch 1.8x is also acceptable; both are DAoC designs.
Personally, I think the new style & new RA are the most perfect designs DAoC has achieved after years of RvR refinement.
Using either a new style or old style patch, or mixed version are OK, as they all come from DAoC.
- The poison application system has been changed to drag and drop poison during combat, which is ridiculous.
Applying poison while fighting --- does this design make common sense?
Placing the weapon in the values or trade slots automatically cancel the poison application.
This reflects Dev's contradictory thinking: they don't want players to use the /switch command, but they also don't want to go back to the traditional drag-and-drop weapon switching --- it shows Dev lacks a good Product Manager, becoming like a headless fly, unsure of which direction to change things.
- Archery: "Crit Shot can no longer be used against targets moving faster than the default run speed (default meaning without sprint), and CS and Volley will grant the target an immunity buff for 30 seconds."
This completely deviates from the classic DAoC design.
I still remember even back in 2004 MLF, my Shaman, in an 8-man guild team at speed 6, was shot by a Scout near AMG; one arrow CS with heavy dmg over 1K, and the second CS dropped the rest hp.
Archers in patch 1.65 were already in a bad state; See Hiden RA specifically targets them, and further nerfing their attack power --- where's the fun in that?
- There are too many messy class changes; For example, they nerfed Armsman Polearm's signature style, Anytime Snare, and almost halved the famous Defender's Rage GR. It's great to see that Dev has finally taken a step back towards restoring them. Due to space limitations, I'll just give another one example. Veteran players know that Valewalker was one of the biggest beneficiaries of the patch 1.8x new style system because the original design was so bad that nobody wanted to play it.
However, we see that Dev's understanding is: "Valewalker is in a good spot, to the point where retouching is not really needed, other than the level 2 style."
I think it's a pity that Dev lacks an experienced Product Manager to do the overall planning.
Dev's core thinking is somewhat like this: they (or players QQ) believe certain classes are too strong, then Dev weakens them, ideally to the point where two players can fight each other for 10 minutes without a clear winner.
My suggestion is to reverse the thinking and give each class a strength.
When you do that, everyone has a chance to win, and players will enjoy playing each class.
As they said, "We are aware that too much customization can be harmful to immersion and authenticity," and indeed, you've really changed too much now.