u/Outrageous_Wealth_53

Pets and stacking pet classes was still incredibly weak after last pet multiclass changes. Pets are stronger, but players are 5-10x stronger than pets. This relativity makes pets weaker than original EQ. On average gear, No player was that much stronger than a pet

It feels bad for pet fantasy classes like Mage Beastlord, where the pet is half of your identity, but significantly weaker than simply playing other classes. It feels very bad to be stacking pet classes and only get + pet inventory slots. Esp when a simple single class enchanter pet (originally one if the weakest pets in EQ) is rivaling a two class mage beast lord pet

Hoping they add some buffs, but I haven’t seen any news on spell updates regarding pets or just pet buffs. So far it doest seem only adding + levels through spell motes, and minimal level stats to pets is enough

I personally believe M and M can have much  success. I read devs hoped for even 10-15k active players. I wouldn’t be surprised if it sold to 100K+ copies. If it’s truly good, I wouldn’t be surprised if it sold more ove time. This game can appeal to younger generations, like original EQ, Runescape, etc did. Everyone’s predicting it appeals only to old school, but it can appeal to so many new people. It can be bigger than EQ. 

But the real take is active subscribers. That’s tougher. After the initial launch, the fate this game takes is determined by active subscriptions. If there’s a huge fallout in the first months, that’s the bigger worry. If EA isn’t fully developed and gets mid reviews, that’s a problem. Anyone who says the success of game doesn’t matter is only fooling themselves. 40 paid devs > 40 volunteer devs. More finances= higher volume of content, speed of development, quality of development. Everything goes up if you have more money. 

The very base of this game is restricted by finances. 1) A portion of releasing EA instead of 1.0 is money. They need to start collecting. 2) They only have so much resource, which limits everything they have done. If they started with more, it could have designed higher visuals, etc. 

As they say, they are volunteers. They only have X time. They can’t volunteer forever. If they are designing in all their free time, how do they play the game too? A volunteer business is almost always a struggle.  So success is important, even if that means 15k subscribers to them. But 50k subscribers is just better for the game. Therein lies the worry. Can M and M retain a decent player base? 

It’s an Incredibly niche market here witt this gameplay and visual graphics (Thousands of potential new players won’t even try this game based on visuals alone, even if they would have loved the game) 

It’s even tighter with all the games out/coming that appeal to the same player base

-Project Gorgon

-Everquest TLP

-Everquest 

*Everquest Legends

-Private Servers

-Pantheon if it ever releases and improves

-Any other throwback D and D MMO: There seem to be a few coming out

*WoW Classic + if it releases, which it probably will. This is a different crowd but there’s a ton of overlap on classic WoW and EQ players. Most original EQ players moved to WoW at some point

And lastly

-Monsters and Memories: Your own self. Everyone’s worst enemy is always yourself. Every game that’s ever failed only has to look in the mirror 

I wish everyone luck! I personally would rather have delayed EA if it means a better start. If they feel confident in EA release as is, power to them. Such as if the game is small but feels good. Then expand the world over time. But if it’s released in a buggy, or poor state, it’s very hard for any game, especially an MMO, especially a niche MMO, to ever recover from a poor start and mid reviews. I hope M and M releases it’s full potential. The game can survive with whatever number they need, 10-15k, but the game can truly thrive if they do it right.

If you only had so much time before launch, and you want to improve something:

What is your top value for the game and why?

List top value, and/or order of importance (Feel free to suggest new value)

1. Classes (everything that comes with)

2. World Space: Big World with lots of biomes and dungeons, beauty, exploration

3. World Content: Filling in world with lore, quests, quirks, etc. making it feel “alive”

4. Combat: Feel, animations, difficulty, Strategy, etc

5. PvP

6. Loot and Economy

7. End game Content

8. Art and Music of the world

9. Tradeskills/Professions

Given time as a constraint for EA;

Would you rather have devs create more zones and space to travel in the world?

or would you rather have them fill in the current world with more lore and content?

A smaller world but rich and alive….or a bigger world with decent content but not as full/rich?

OR are both required? and they should simply delay EA until they feel they have a complete game then expand that world over time?

complete game can be however big or small they feel, but devs/players are fully satisfied with what’s there

I’m not sure why people are hating on Charm as much as they are. It was nerfed very badly from EQ. Sure, there are balance reasons, which I can’t address all of. But mostly it’s the argument of it being overpowered. “If something is optimal, then you have to do it or it’s unfair to other classes“ “ Optimal way to play Charm is to solo so you have to play solo“ “Fastest Group Exp is charm so everyone has to do charm groups”

Why? What’s the rush? Is this a game people wish to play long term? Why mix/max everything? It’s been shown on dozens of TLP servers if various mmos that min max doesnt enhance joy to majority of players. Some do, but most Min maxxers do it for other reasons: Power, Ego, Quick Raids, Race to first, etc. If you’re Playing charm instead of your true desirw just because it’s strong, is that true fun?

Enchanter charm is the core fun of the class. Without it, you are mostly a buff bot with crowd control. And for me, that’s not as fun. It removes my desire to play Ench, which is the main reason I wish to play in general.

Charm nerfs hits enchanters the hardest, necros, and/or then druids. But esp enchanters because they have no place in raids. They are excellent in solo and group content, virtually pointless in raids.

And That is part of the balance too. Something may be strong early, but not as strong late. Early overpowered but weak late. So is it truly so terrible for some strategies or classes to be strong in solo, or group, but not in raids?

Everyone’s not going Charmers because then you can’t raid. In EQ charm groups were strong, but AOE stun farming groups formed too. That actually became the go to number 1 at some points in time. Along with other strategies.

Remember too beta players are more prone to min max, to over analyze. Class representation and play style is highly skewed in betas. Many, maybe a majority, of the players on live won’t be playing the beta (at least not hard) or min maxing classes on a live release. So saying charm is so OP without testing it fully end game is also skewed data.

If we follow this same philosophy of Charm must be nerfed so badly.…If one tank is better in groups, are they going to nerf that too? Optimal tank in raids? Nerf it. A new solo strategy arises from any class that nets good exp? Nerf that too. If one healer is the optimal raid healer, nerf it? If a few classes dominate raid dps, nerf them because that’s the optimal way to raid, to dps, to play.

The game’s about having fun in your way. It’s fun if some classes can solo. There will never be true balance between so many classes. There will always be an optimal way, that doesn’t mean it should constantly be nerfed hard like the endless LOL balance cycle.

It’s really a bigger nerf than people think because there never was much place in a raid for enchanters or charm. EQ was never balanced, it was awful, but they let people play things out for long periods of time before considering hard nerfs. That was fun! Strong early, not great late is a higher form of overall balance I enjoyed about EQ. Laissez Faire Letting the players work things out, then stepping in if there’s a crisis. Let the game play out before over nerfing

Even after buffs, Pets are not in a fun spot in a game that’s designed to be fun. They cap at level max level 42. They aren't fulfilling the fantasy

It‘s esp bad for pet stacking. It’s ruining the fantasy. If all you get is + slots for inventory and maybe an AA or two for stacking pet classes. That’s awful. Major Pets classes need help, and serious buffs. Minimum if you have two major pet classes, it adds +50-100% stats or more. Or combines power of both pets. Or adds +8 pet levels and increased spells/abilities comparable to the level raise

or add some new to game AA to each pet classes to buff pets, or put in more focus. This game is designed to be Overpowered and fun. Give the classes who double stack pets that fantasy. This game is purely for fun, just make it more fun for the pet users :)

Do starting race stats really matter? Original EQ they did for leveling, as it was hard to cap, but later they eventually maxed.

Also, does primary starting class matter more than your secondary multi classes? or is it strictly a racial lock?

I wanted to go mage beastlord. is there any benefit to making the mage the primary starting class? Or can I go Vah Shir Beastlorsd first then mage second and still have mage pet as my main Without ant handicaps?

Thank you so much

Every game has a maximum amount of players it can reach. Call it a genetic potential.

You have a genetic potential to reach a certain height, and whether or not you reach that potential depends on your environment, how much you eat, et cetera.

Every game has a maximum potential for its players.RPGs have a certain amount, MMOs have a certain amount, first person shooters, et cetera.

The more niche game, the less potential max players. This game has far less potential max players than most games. Even less than most other RPGs and MMOs. Which means one has to be extra careful with it’s player base. This game player base is delicate and of utmost importance. Add in the possible competition of a similar niche: Everquest Legends, Pantheon, Progression Servers, and other possible releases, that player base grows more delicate.

And Some are saying they don’t care, this is a passion project, they just want to make their game however they want to. But I guarantee you that’s not true. Because it is based on passion, it matters more to them than devs on payroll. Because they sacrificed so much, they want it succeed more than almost any company. They care about success, whatever that may be for them. Success has many forms. 

Maybe they just want to play a fun game. But to do that, you need community. 

So every time they make changes that drive players away, you are shrinking your player base, shrinking your game, shrinking a chance to grow your game and see it evolve to be something that you always hoped it could be. 

Shrinking a game that is entirely built around player interaction is the # 1 worst choice from a design standpoint. 

Example, removing druid bear pets…Logical? Sure they have their reasons that fit their vision. It’s their right and their vision. 

Necessary? No. Definite No. What harm does a bear pet really do? Does it make the game any worse in any way? Most people don’t care about silly bear pets. But this small change will drive X number of players away because they're angry, and they liked the bear pets. Whether that be 1 player, 100, or 1,000 in the long run. (Yes it’s entirely possible and probable over the life of a game that 1,000 new or continuing players would have played if there was a bear pet)  

Removing that bear makes the game less fun for anyone who liked the bear pet. And It doesn’t really hurt anyone else to have the bear pet exist. It must fit some Addition by subtraction ideal for cleanup, but this was a mistake. Cleanup spells, combine spells, etc. Let em keep their bear. It matters. It’s fun. 

Will you quit if druids have a bear pet? Will you have less fun? Can you think of anyone who would quit because a druid has a bear? Probably not. But I’ve already seen some druids who are upset the bear’s gone. One girl has made a video of it.

To add then take away is heartbreaking for some druids. And overall I think it fits the druid theme don’t you? Let me ask, why do Shamans get a wolf pet when druids are more attuned with animals? Because EQ devs decided to give Shamans a pet and MnM devs followed suit? So shaman pets are kept just because nostalgia? Shamans would be downhearted if their pet is removed. If anything a druid bear fits the lore more than many spells/abilities in game, more than SK pets even.  

Shadow knight pets, I’m sure feel the same.

Nerf or altering EQ enchanters in too significant way, drives away all the players who wanted that. Et cetera.

Insert X topic 

Keep in mind the bear pet is one example Of an overall greater philosophy.

Design needs to be very considerate with the changes made

You have to ask yourself, is this change adding players, or is this change removing players?

I understand there are reasons for it that fit into whatever vision you possess. But I am inclined to ponder. Unless SK pet removal is somehow assisting a new design that is ultimately more fun than SK without the pet, I ask why? Would not that new design be just as fun with a gimp pet? 

——-

This philosophy is all assumed from the target audience crowd you're creating for.

For instance, you're not just trying to add mass players like a WOW by making the game easier, etc. This is a hardcore RPG MMO with danger and consequences. That alone is alienating most players, but it’s also the guiding philosophy for the target players, and it gives meaning, depth, and fun to the people who will play. 

But Once the target audience is zoned in on, 

RPG MMO EQ type players looking for that long lost experience for all its reasons. Once the game philosophy and foundational conditions are set, and you know what you’re making…. from there, the number one design decision should be “On a fundamental level: is this decision making the game more fun for all the players it affects? Or less fun?” 

Is this removing players? Or is this adding players?

Because in the end, that’s all that matters. Fun, and keeping/growing players

My thoughts, if it’s not adding to the fun, or helping the players enjoy the game more…why do it?  

For a game based on player and social interaction, the player base is everything. The best way to keep a healthy player base, and grow your player base to reach new players who could love the game, is to make the game as fun as possible

What would be the optimal amount of 1) land mass and 2) Zones at launch? At EA? 3) What is the optimal amount of different regions.

Land Mass= virtual space in existence. Katanas = 1 zone each but huge space/land mass

Zones= Distinct areas, terrain, theme type

What would give players enough space to feel a sense of exploration or awe? What would be enough space to prevent overcrowding? Is there such a thing as too much space?

EQ had around 44 zones and 14 dungeons at launch, the land mass was large. The world felt huge.

I had almost forgotten how much the actual enormity of world itself contributed to EQ. The exploration, the mystery.

Is it good to keep each zone under one general theme? Or can one zone have multiple themes/terrain types? Is it better to have more spacious zones with room between each area of importance, or zones more compacted with material? For example, Ocean of tears and many pathway zones were mostly empty space, but may contribute in adding to the world in ways. Are you that person who likes to disappear into the open areas and find a hidden gem?

BONUS: Do they need more amounts of terrain and theme types: deserts, forests, jungles, fire, ice, plains, water vs islands, planar, mountains, or other fantasy terrain. Is the game too ”deserty?”

Compared to EQ original release Norrath, from Qeynos to Freeport to Ak’anon, how full is the world before Early Access? Terrain and content?

Dear Community: This is a heartfelt post for me. This my two cents, everyone follows their own path. I was very excited for this game. i played EQ from Kunark onwards, WOW on day 1. I eventually almost died of autoimmune disease in life. Some of my best memories are of Norrath, Kunark, Velious, and yes Luclin too! *gasp* I found joy in many elements of the game, even when others found criticism. I haven’t been this excited for a game in a while.

I started my journey in EQ as a Half Elf Ranger of Kelethin (ahhh that music, those orcs, and all the other memories) Eventually after a year of wasting my life (aka playing a ranger in Everquest) I realized how pathetic I was. I still had a blast! I became a master of Castle Mistmoore. I had many fun times, even as the crippled gimp with a handsome half elf face.

I made my second life’s mistake (no, I didn’t get married again) I rolled a gnome mage. I say mistake because as much fun as I had, I saw necros were simply superior. It peeved me. But looking back, I see the Ego in my young self. Even though I hated necros, I confess out of resentment. I didn’t want them nerfed.

I enjoyed grouping as a mage but I liked to solo more, which is why I divorced my Ranger. I was always finding cool ways to solo as a wee ranger, even if it be slower than a group. Mage and Ranger, I hit 60 mostly soloing. Eventually I found my way to an enchanter main, and found my true love. Invis vs UD and invis, mezz, memblur, and most of all charmed pets. I moved around zones like an INT assassin With combos of both invis, stuns, mezzes, memblurs. Guk, Chardok, Seb…all zones were my stomping grounds. I could pick off named almost anywhere, then move on, or solo a camp. Yes, I was OP! But I was also pretty damn good too. Mowns of all, I enjoyed the creativity behind it, the strategy of EQ and Enchanters. I died a lot, often 2-3 corpses piled up and forming my own graveyards. i died more than anyone, but I also learned more, because failure is the greatest teacher. People wondered how I did so well soloing big drops guildless.…it was because Ench was OP, but also because I took risks, I learned and perfected areas

I solo’ed Froglok King and Ghoul Lord at 46. I soloed brother Qwinn at 50 by spending a week testing every mob as a charm pet im Southern Karana. After finding my guy (or gal for all you know) I full geared it. I sat back with SoW chain casting Rune on my pet. When charm broke, I kited until bro Q had a pathing that gave me a chance to recharm. Then I would kite until/if pet got aggro, max distance and rune chain.

I died many times perfecting this strategy. I gathered gear for my pet. I practiced and fine tumed my strategy. I achieved the pinnacle of my EQ career. And the memories, the fun, everything that came with it. This is Life. This was Everquest. Strategy, innovation, fun niches, devs not controlling or over balancing.

EQ was not known for class balance, and that’s ok. Today’s world of meta chasers and min maxxers is a different lot. The purpose of playing for joy is lost on many. The jealousy of If it’s strong, nerf it, has saddened me. The idea of “Nerf this now because it ruins game” is our Ego coming into play. I understand why there are reasons people feel this way. Just know I do understand you, more than you know. However my overall value is joy. We play for joy.

I am saddened to see both devs and community agree Charm needs to be heavily nerfed. I am sad to see people say Charm is ruining game because there’s an “optimal way” to play, and people solo charm or charmed pets have top dps. This was a part of EQ. EQ was never ruined because charm was strong.….

Now everyone is crying afoul of anything that isn‘t perfectly balanced. As everyone min max dps, leveling speed, etc. There have been endless stories of people min maxxing both games and in life, then waking up and realizing if you are not having fun, it’s pointless.

In the end, I was never jealous of enchanters when I played Ranger. I was pissed I wasn’t a necro, but I still thought they were cool, even if better than my mage. I never once wanted them nerfed, I wanted mages buffed! There were plenty of people playing all classes. Some played far less, some far more. INT classes were always OP through most of EQ for majority % of the players. But the game was a blast.

What I enjoy most about EQ and tell everyone as I go on happy rants and probably bore most of them, was they didn’t try to control everything. The fact there were crazy things, overpowered things, niches, subtleties.

Please do not nerf charm, just make it more dangerous. I’d rather have a high risk high reward charm, than a gimp safe charm. Please do not remove joy. Please find a way to allow the classic feel of charm to persevere into this game. Please do not allow the argument of what’s optimal and perfectly balanced to be the trumping value of design.

Have you ever played a game that was true balance? Has there ever been a single game of any genre, where classes/heroes were not nerfed and buffed? It does not exist. It’s an endless cycle. If Charm is the OP enemy of community today, there will be something else OP tomorrow, at game launch. This is life.

I have decided if MnM takes the Blizzard path, or the path most devs take in today’s games of over correcting and controlling, I will not play. For me, my one true love is Charm. And that’s what I wanted to play here. This literally broke my heart to decide, because I can’t tell you how excited I am. It really saddens me to see how people are trying to control this game so hard by removing joy. There has to be another way.…

I am but one man, and matter little in the grand scheme. But where there is one, there is many. And if you can drive away a true lover, there must be something to your actions that is contributing.

Agree, disagree I genuinely wish you all peace and happiness. I hope this game is a blast for each and every one of you. I hope it leaves you with lovely memories, and joy