+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 45

Thread: The "Rogue" thread.

  1. #1
    Kak
    Kak is offline
    Soulwalker Kak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    24

    Default The "Rogue" thread.

    Alright, I'm going to be that guy. You know, the guy who starts a thread, says what he wants, and damns the rest of you for disagreeing. THAT guy. (Except not really).

    Key points to a "Rogue" class, in my opinion - I'll delineate some stuff afterwards, too.

    1) Highest sustained DPS. Positional melee - ie, you must be "flanking" the mob. In some cases, this can be up to and including the sides, but typically it is from behind. I don't mean highest melee, I mean highest overall.

    2) Good (but not the best) burst DPS. This means a rogue won't be a one hit kill, but over time, their damage from melee attacks plus special abilities means they have the highest DPS overall.

    3) The best stealth in the game. Invisibility spells mean you can't be seen by living, Invisibility to Undead spells are for undead... Stealth does both. And as a skill that we have to "train" and CAN be spotted if unlucky, it does both invis and ITU. We take a speed hit, we shouldn't be spotted in general (some mix of how EQ, EQ2, WoW, and VG do it - I'll go into further detail later).

    4) Poisons. I've never been a big fan of them, because most systems implemented in games SUCK. A good poison system would be fantastic.

    5) Locks, traps, etc. Not a big deal to me, but to some it is. They should be there.

    Now, to explain and expand on those thoughts, to get some true discussion going instead of "NUH-UH!" responses.

    DPS. It's a touchy subject, and casters always hate rogues because of our opinions, but let me explain. Casters, typically, are far enough out to avoid AEs, and have a "hate/agro" reduction due to distance on top of it. Rogues, typically, have good agro management skills that casters lack, but eat every single AE. To me, the whole "well, we wear cloth and one hit kills us" argument is pointless as I take 1.5 hits to die versus your one, and I am taking every single AE, so I need a LOT more healing than you ever will. So leaving that out of it - Wizards should be highest burst DPS, and rogues number 2. Rogues should be number 1 sustained DPS, and Necros number 2. Mages, with pets, should be close to necros in sustained damage, Druids as a combination of DoTs and DDs should be close as well. Rangers/Archers whatever, should be close in sustained as well. NOBODY should come close to wizards burst DPS, in a "ranged" aspect, as it's their specialty (agro management is how they keep "burst" from becoming sustained). Same goes for rogues and sustained dps, it's what we do (though a necro with DoT spells should be close, but again agro management should be harder for them). I'll argue this point til the day I die, but casters should NOT be higher DPS than melee, especially when you look at what else you lose. Wizards, in general, have high burst DPS, good sustained DPS, and relatively little utility - Rogues have high sustained DPS, good burst DPS, and relatively little utility. Wizards avoid AEs, Rogues do not. Hell, in VG, Sorcs had just as much HP as I did, I just had an extra 500 AC - which meant absolutely nothing when I ate 5k AEs, and the wizard stood so far away they never got touched. So please don't throw that argument at me - unless every single AE hits every single player ... and there's no "melee only specials" like rampage or whatever... that argument is flawed, and I will wholeheartedly disagree with you.

    Locks, traps, that sort of thing: I'm all for locks, and lockpicking. That gives rogues SOME utility. Should there be a "knock" type spell that casters have so it's not JUST rogues? Yes. Should rogues be "better" - yeah, but again, rogue doing it in 5 seconds versus a caster having a 10 second spell... or rogues being 100% if they have the required skill levelled up, and casters having a 25% failure chance (but they can cast again, I don't want it to fail and lose whatever there is)... that is 100% fair. Rangers could be better at traps, or equal, and still have some classes with a spell or something. Again, I don't want to FORCE anything, but rogues having just a little tiny bit of utility would be awesome.

    Poisons: Really, this is another one of those things that if done correctly is a no brainer. When done terribly, nobody uses it. Good DPS increasing poisons, agro management poisons, even something like a "mind control" poison (for stun/mez or something) on a limited basis... Health drain, mana drain, stat drain... all great except in most games Mobs have so much or those stat drains don't actually change anything. Silence poisons, again, same problem. I know in VG, I had all these poisons, but they were ignored by almost every mob, because mob's "spells" were "skills" - so silence did nothing, mana drain meant nothing cuz even if it DID pull from their mana pool, they had so much, or so much regen, that it was pointless. One hit big burst poisons, small DoT poisons, etc - I should have lots of choices, to fit playstyle. I should also be able to coat another person's weapon, which just is common sense. Maybe have some poisons only a rogue can use due to "specializations" or something, but I should be able to dip someone else's knife, ya know? Or coat their axe edge. Hammers/clubs... maybe not.. ;) Let rangers do it too, even if it's a different set of abilities (aka, rogues do fire, ice, poison, disease... more "burst" with minimal DoT stuff, and a little more utility... rangers have more DoT stuff, primarily disease and poison, bards can do some fire/ice stuff, etc.) Maybe only rogues can coat other people's weapons. I dunno, I don't want to overpower rogues, but rogues give up a LOT of utility, this gives us some back.

    Alright, stealth... this is a big one. I don't want "full speed invis and invis to undead and never be seen and OMG I WANT TO BE A GOD." No, I think there needs to be something like how VG did it - except VG was broken (and I could be spotted IN stealth before someone without stealth would be spotted)... you have a skill of hide/sneak, mobs have a "Detect" skill. If yours is higher, you can get closer before they spot you - touch them and they notice you. That's fine. Please, please, PLEASE, do not have a "ignores stealth" flag. Again, invisibility is a SPELL, and a "see invis" spell should see through it. A rogue gives up speed (aka, normally at least 25% reduction in speed) because we're carefully picking our way through the field or dungeon or whatever - same goes for rangers, and other "Scout" types. I don't think a ranger (who has an invis spell) should be able to get their hide/sneak skill as high as a rogue, because rogues specialize in it, rangers don't.

    All that stuff could be split into the different types of "rogue" class. Assassins equal the DPS class, maybe higher burst and slightly less sustained than a Blade Dancer... or Assassins being the poison specialist, with access to more useful poisons (aka, higher burst DPS, higher DoTs, etc). Maybe one of the other scout classes has a higher skill cap on stealth. Another has a high skill cap on locks/traps etc. There's lots of ways to do this, though personally I think there shouldn't be a huge difference in the archetype if they are all "rogues."

    The biggest issue that I've ever found as a rogue, is that they are either rare (like in VG) because we sucked solo and excelled in group/raid play... or overplayed (like WoW) because they are broken and/or overpowered. We need to find a nice middle ground here - I don't like being the only rogue around, even if I do like being highest DPS (until a ranger beats me, in which case I /wrist).

    Anyway - I don't do PvP, and don't particularly care about it's "problems." I do acknowledge that "stealth" has to have a counter in PvP, which is why players should have a detect skill too ;) Armor/skills/poisons what have you can raise the rogue's hide/sneak skills, and raise a players detection skill. (So a level 50 rogue with 500 skill, and wearing a +50 hide/sneak wouldn't be spotted by a level 50 without any detect raising gear, but someone with like, +30 detect would see them within 10m or something - +50 would negate the rogue altogether). The different types would have to be just as equal in rarity though - if there's tons of +stealth gear, and next to no +detect... or vice versa, it's not fair or balanced.
    Kakarat - Rogues do it better. No, I didn't forget the last bit, we just do it better.

  2. #2
    Plane Walker Goremarr's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Calgary, AB
    Posts
    495

    Default

    Damage Output
    I'll leave that one alone because there practically no classes revealed, let alone information about these classes. File the under 'wait and see' until more information is available. You did mention melee classes standing in AoEs or having joust in and out because of them, and I agree with that. I think that one mechanic that was under-utilized and could help to mitigate that problem would be the npc 'fixating' on a target that is more than x meters away from them. They start whipping projectiles or spells that don't hit the target immediately, forcing the caster to get the hell out of Dodge instead of sitting there happily casting away without fear. I'm also an advocate for some AoEs hitting everyone who is tied to that encounter, regardless of how far away they are. But I'm getting off on a tangent here.

    Locks and Traps
    A lot of people may not like the idea of them, but I think that they are huge devices which can be put in the game and can give the Rogue classes real utility in a group. I don't know if I'd put traps in front of places that are required to complete an objective. Maybe locked doors/traps in front of what could be considered optional or bonus rooms and chests. This way, any group that just wants to get in and get out, they don't necessarily need a rogue. But any group that wants to completely clear a dungeon will spend some time looking for one to round out their group. A version of the Knock spell is a good idea for doors, but I think that trapsmithing should be exclusive unto the Rogues. If you aren't a rogue, you don't get to fiddle with the trap in the middle of the room. Sorry. Any multiclassing available would leave a little room for some minor proficiency with traps. But, should a multiclassed Rogue be able to handle the trap in that optional room in Endgame Dungeon #3? Not a chance. You may as well wail on it with a mace.

    One example of where traps and locks have worked (and very well, in my opinion) is DDO. You can usually get around traps, but life is made so much easier when there's a rogue to disarm them for you. With traps, I would like the possibility of fumbling and destroying the control panel, rendering it impossible to disarm the trap. This would be tied in with the skill of the rogue against the difficulty level of the trap and taking the system directly from DDO. But some modified version of the system would be very enjoyable in the game.

    Poisons
    This system would probably take a little bit of work. I really haven't seen a system that really blew my hair back. However, poisons aren't something that I think everyone who qualifies as a rogue should be able to use. It doesn't seem like a Blade Dancer would be a class that would use poisons. They seem more like something that would be utilized by an Assassin and could be used as a major point of differentiation (as you mentioned in your post). A Blade Dancer may have slightly higher melee damage output, but the poisons that an Assassin uses could bypass physical damage reduction, allowing them a slight advantage on high-mitigation npc's. On an npc like a caster with low mitigation, a Blade Dancer will have the advantage since they would naturally hit a little harder to compensate for their lack of poisons.

    Stealth
    I don't like straight up stealth. Nothing can see you unless you walk out in front of it. I like the idea of having to use your environment in order to maintain stealth. If you are trying to stalk someone in the middle of a sunny field, it just isn't going to happen unless you sneak up behind them. If you cross into their peripheral vision, you're getting caught. If you're trying to get the drop on a group of patrolling guards in a dungeon, there will more than likely be shadows that you can use to hide your presence. If you jump them from the shadows, you're golden. If you cross in front of them underneath a torch, you've blown your cover. Some kind of detection of perception skill could be used to help combat stealth in PvP to an extent, but I think that the optimal system will require that a player use stealth in an intelligent way in order to be successful. I'm sorry, but sneaking up towards someone directly in front of them then doing whatever you want doesn't wash with me.


    I intentionally left Rangers out of the Rogue discussion because I'm stubborn and refuse to lump them together (in D&D, the Ranger is a subclass of the Fighter). But I know that in EQ2 they were Scouts, so I may be fighting a losing battle there. Keep churning out the ideas. Who knows? Some of them may even get picked up by the development team. That's what these forums are for, right?

    The Unofficial Oldschool Server - Because a kick-*** community doesn't just build itself.
    Also, be sure to visit RiftSeekers so that Faelor doesn't beat me this week.

  3. #3
    Kak
    Kak is offline
    Soulwalker Kak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Goremarr View Post
    Damage Output
    I'll leave that one alone because there practically no classes revealed, let alone information about these classes. File the under 'wait and see' until more information is available. You did mention melee classes standing in AoEs or having joust in and out because of them, and I agree with that. I think that one mechanic that was under-utilized and could help to mitigate that problem would be the npc 'fixating' on a target that is more than x meters away from them. They start whipping projectiles or spells that don't hit the target immediately, forcing the caster to get the hell out of Dodge instead of sitting there happily casting away without fear. I'm also an advocate for some AoEs hitting everyone who is tied to that encounter, regardless of how far away they are. But I'm getting off on a tangent here.

    Locks and Traps
    A lot of people may not like the idea of them, but I think that they are huge devices which can be put in the game and can give the Rogue classes real utility in a group. I don't know if I'd put traps in front of places that are required to complete an objective. Maybe locked doors/traps in front of what could be considered optional or bonus rooms and chests. This way, any group that just wants to get in and get out, they don't necessarily need a rogue. But any group that wants to completely clear a dungeon will spend some time looking for one to round out their group. A version of the Knock spell is a good idea for doors, but I think that trapsmithing should be exclusive unto the Rogues. If you aren't a rogue, you don't get to fiddle with the trap in the middle of the room. Sorry. Any multiclassing available would leave a little room for some minor proficiency with traps. But, should a multiclassed Rogue be able to handle the trap in that optional room in Endgame Dungeon #3? Not a chance. You may as well wail on it with a mace.

    One example of where traps and locks have worked (and very well, in my opinion) is DDO. You can usually get around traps, but life is made so much easier when there's a rogue to disarm them for you. With traps, I would like the possibility of fumbling and destroying the control panel, rendering it impossible to disarm the trap. This would be tied in with the skill of the rogue against the difficulty level of the trap and taking the system directly from DDO. But some modified version of the system would be very enjoyable in the game.

    Poisons
    This system would probably take a little bit of work. I really haven't seen a system that really blew my hair back. However, poisons aren't something that I think everyone who qualifies as a rogue should be able to use. It doesn't seem like a Blade Dancer would be a class that would use poisons. They seem more like something that would be utilized by an Assassin and could be used as a major point of differentiation (as you mentioned in your post). A Blade Dancer may have slightly higher melee damage output, but the poisons that an Assassin uses could bypass physical damage reduction, allowing them a slight advantage on high-mitigation npc's. On an npc like a caster with low mitigation, a Blade Dancer will have the advantage since they would naturally hit a little harder to compensate for their lack of poisons.

    Stealth
    I don't like straight up stealth. Nothing can see you unless you walk out in front of it. I like the idea of having to use your environment in order to maintain stealth. If you are trying to stalk someone in the middle of a sunny field, it just isn't going to happen unless you sneak up behind them. If you cross into their peripheral vision, you're getting caught. If you're trying to get the drop on a group of patrolling guards in a dungeon, there will more than likely be shadows that you can use to hide your presence. If you jump them from the shadows, you're golden. If you cross in front of them underneath a torch, you've blown your cover. Some kind of detection of perception skill could be used to help combat stealth in PvP to an extent, but I think that the optimal system will require that a player use stealth in an intelligent way in order to be successful. I'm sorry, but sneaking up towards someone directly in front of them then doing whatever you want doesn't wash with me.


    I intentionally left Rangers out of the Rogue discussion because I'm stubborn and refuse to lump them together (in D&D, the Ranger is a subclass of the Fighter). But I know that in EQ2 they were Scouts, so I may be fighting a losing battle there. Keep churning out the ideas. Who knows? Some of them may even get picked up by the development team. That's what these forums are for, right?
    DPS is key to the rogue class for me - I got the opportunity to help "re-balance" the rogue in Vanguard, and it chafed heavily that a Sorceror who never got hit by AE did more DPS than I did (then again, they typically couldn't manage agro for crap). Again, it's a personal thing - I don't feel that ranged characters should do more DPS than melee in general - and rogues are the positional melee, and therefore highest DPS. There's no such thing as "positional" ranged damage, heh. PS: I'm trying to avoid raid discussion at the moment, that is a whole new ball of wax.

    I have no problem with locks and traps being "Rogue specialties" - I just don't think that we should be REQUIRED. I don't want to give up DPS because there's a "trap" before the boss mob that we are there for. Rogues are the most specialized melee class, and due to that, we trade off a LOT of utility to focus on one or 2 key things - in my opinion, that should be DPS and stealth. Locks/traps/etc should be something we get as a bonus, and used in quests for class abilities, and maybe phat lewtz (aka, like VG they have a special pickpocket table - that helped with our poisons, or a little cash, or whatever). It shouldn't be something the class FOCUSES on, and it shouldn't be something that you HAVE to have a rogue to do. Unless there's a specialization that focuses on it, and I can keep my damage and stealth, then you can have your traps and locks, heh. Again, this is a personal preference - I don't feel ANY class should have to be there. You can use any tank, any healer, and melee dps, any ranged dps - not REQUIRE a Warrior, Cleric, and Rogue. If there's a way to "switch" specialties, then sure - let me specialize in my DPS and Stealth, and I can switch over to traps/locks/etc when the guild/raid requires, and switch back to my preferred role later.

    Poisons, again - it all depends on the system we get. I do like the thought that Blade Dancers in general do higher DPS, but Assassin's have poisons to get around melee mitigation, etc. I hate gimping myself, but that seems to be a fair trade off - BD = higher DPS, but Assassin's do on specific targets (and if they implement a way to share the poison with others, it would ALWAYS be adding to the group/raid as an assassin, and BD's just have their solo be high enough to offset that gain - maybe Assassin's can only coat one other person's weapon along with their own? Or maybe their own group, it adds a few hundred DPS or something). Well ,I say few hundred, but we dunno what everyone will be doing yet ;)

    Stealth... I'm very much in the mindset that if I practice enough (aka, high enough skill) I can hide right in front of your nose... if you are targetting me, aka, I've agroed you or something, no, I can't - but a skill like Escape to let me make you forget you know about me on a midlength cooldown timer (not 10 minutes, not 10 seconds... somewhere in between, heh). I don't think it's fair a bard can dance and sing and play his drum and be invis from the mob while running at 300% speed... and me be at 75% speed and him see me because I walk into his peripheral vision. Again, as I mentioned in the stealther thread... there's a tradeoff. Either we get some OTHER tradeoff to "invis" being "neener neener you can't see me", or we get no speed reduction, in which case... we're not "stealthy," we're just "invis." Heh. Secondly, while I love the thought of using terrain and all that - that's not a "skill" - I can use terrain as a warrior, or cleric, or whatever - and I have in previous games (including Vanguard, with it's broken *** stealth system where I was seen FARTHER OUT than the normal spot radius, heh) - just knowing the game itself was better as stealth than most. And VG also nuked all stealth against bosses (aka, APW, my stealth was actually a liability, because I could agro a mob farther away than the raid would be seen... and I HAD to be in stealth because it was my DPS and agro reducing stance - I actually GAINED agro in my non stealth stance).

    Basically, Stealth in an MMO is never going to be what we all wish it could be. So if it's gonna be gimped to MMO standards, it should be as powerful as invis/itu/etc - we trade a LOT for our ability to use stealth as a skill instead of using invis potions or whatever - stealth should be at least as good.

    PS: Using feign death to scout instead of a rogue with stealth is just plain wrong ;)
    Kakarat - Rogues do it better. No, I didn't forget the last bit, we just do it better.

  4. #4
    Ascendant Europe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    East Lansing, Michigan
    Posts
    1,957

    Default

    Personally, I really hated VG's "dps tiers". I'd like to see more of a WoW-based system where you're using different spells or skills based on your itemization. So casters might clip out a spell in their rotation once they get enough haste, that kind of thing. The point is, it creates a lot more factors for being "good" at your class. And obviously, having somewhat fewer attacks without having everything pointed out to you with lengthy cooldowns encourages players to figure out which skill use is appropriate for each situation.

    The goal is to create the opportunity for each guild to have a more dynamic sense of "who's on top of the meter". You see it in WoW all the time. Some guilds have beastly mages, some rogues, some warlocks, etc. So when players from different guilds talk, they're usually bewildered at how different DPS can be between the two guilds. I think that's a really elegant solution, where you are ultimately thinking harder about "which player do I want to bring?" than "well, guess we need more rogues for this encounter."
    <a href=http://www.trinityguild.org target=_blank>http://www.trinityguild.org/images/signatures/rift/sig_final.png</a>
    I mean, I guess it would just be a guy who you know, grabs bananas and runs. Or, um, a banana that grabs things. I donít know.
    Why would a banana grab another banana? I mean, those are the kind of questions I donít want to answer.

  5. #5
    Ascendant Kalbuir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    2,265

    Default

    To be really honest when I read your thread I just get the impression you want to play a melee class with stealth that is top dps. (nothing wrong with that tho) But you don't really care much about the other key parts of a rogue or anything like that (poisons, lock picking etc). So I wonder if (IN RIFT) rangers had positional dps, stealth and would be top dps. Wouldn't this be the class for you? and if not why?

    Regards,
    Kalbuir

  6. #6
    Shield of Telara Martie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    735

    Default

    Usually all the other classes got something class specific, equal to the rogues traps n lockpicking, that needs to be done, that they're the only one being able to do. So it's not just the rogues that 'suffers'. And IMO rogues should have less DPS than other classes, with all the stuns and abilities they have that keeps the enemies from doing DPS.

  7. #7
    Ascendant Europe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    East Lansing, Michigan
    Posts
    1,957

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalbuir View Post
    To be really honest when I read your thread I just get the impression you want to play a melee class with stealth that is top dps. (nothing wrong with that tho) But you don't really care much about the other key parts of a rogue or anything like that (poisons, lock picking etc). So I wonder if (IN RIFT) rangers had positional dps, stealth and would be top dps. Wouldn't this be the class for you? and if not why?

    Regards,
    Kalbuir
    Knowing him? No. You're dead on, really. He wants stealth, melee, #1 dps.
    <a href=http://www.trinityguild.org target=_blank>http://www.trinityguild.org/images/signatures/rift/sig_final.png</a>
    I mean, I guess it would just be a guy who you know, grabs bananas and runs. Or, um, a banana that grabs things. I donít know.
    Why would a banana grab another banana? I mean, those are the kind of questions I donít want to answer.

  8. #8
    Ascendant Europe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    East Lansing, Michigan
    Posts
    1,957

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Martie View Post
    And IMO rogues should have less DPS than other classes, with all the stuns and abilities they have that keeps the enemies from doing DPS.
    I think we can agree on these two things:

    1. doing arbitrarily less DPS in a PVE fight like a raid just because you're a better PVP class is not fun.

    2. being stunlocked is not fun.

    Unless you're suggesting that rogues stun in those types of PVE situations, in which case I'm not sure if that would be very balanced. Hitting the dragon in the back of the head with a blackjack and all :P
    <a href=http://www.trinityguild.org target=_blank>http://www.trinityguild.org/images/signatures/rift/sig_final.png</a>
    I mean, I guess it would just be a guy who you know, grabs bananas and runs. Or, um, a banana that grabs things. I donít know.
    Why would a banana grab another banana? I mean, those are the kind of questions I donít want to answer.

  9. #9
    Shield of Telara Martie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    735

    Default

    They do interupt spells and abilites in PvE, not all but some.
    And PvP, if they're able to keep you stunlocked til you're dead, it's something wrong with the balance and that's why they shouldn't do huge amounts of dmg to begin with. Or ofc, not have all these stuns and interupts.
    Make abilities options in you specc, and not trainable. So you don't have all the stuns and locks for both PvE and PvP.

  10. #10
    Champion Bellatrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    The Grid
    Posts
    580

    Default

    I love playing a rogue, but would this class be unbalanced? If a rogue is able to do all of those things, would it be overpowered and overplayed?

    All in all, interesting ideas, especially the ones for stealth, poison, and traps.

    ďThey say you are to be the greatest hero in a past Iíll never know. Learn this, and it shall be so:
    Let the only fear you ever know be the fear you inspire in your foes.
    If you can do that in your heart, glory will follow you.Ē

  11. #11
    Rift Disciple s33kNDstroy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    196

    Default

    Kakarat, good post. Being someone who played a rogue in EQ1, I can appreciate your view point. At the same time I played a sorc in VG and saw the flip side to this coin. It's a fine line imo. I think you're exagerating a little about HP and AC being meaningless. You had something like twice my sorcs HP and AC in VG, not that I had much, but still, it was a big jump. It was enough to usually make the difference between living or dying. You are right, alot of the boss encounters that had AE, casters would stand out of range, but as you pointed out the agro management for the amount of dps casters put out often resulted in a one shot death if they tipped the scale. And casters didn't always have the luxury of standing out of AE. I'll give you majority, but not against everything.

    As for utility in VG sorcs had.......next to nothing...that I remember...A single target invis spell that was iffy in duration, and a group evac spell, which was actually fairly useful, except when it was misclicked. But they even gave rogues and fighters a helmet that had the ability to cast evac....so....we had.......like one utility. A class that has next to no utilities, no AC, no HP, I think deserves to be at the TIPPY TOP of the food chain in the dps dept. That's in a VG world tho. Give us more utility, more anything, and I could see rogues and sorcs being semi EQUAL. ;)

    Talking about burst dps, how about assassination for rogues in EQ1. I miss that. I can see your point of view about rogues being better sustained dps, but if a sorc can start their dps out slowly, and then focus it, amplify it, and then all out BURST IT at the end of a fight, and say take a targets HP from 30% to 0 in the last 6 seconds, casters can do just as much or slightly more than a rogue overall. The question would really become, how good is the player at managing agro. As a tank forming a group, do you want a rogue who is naturally better at managing agro and who can take a hit, and who has useful utilities, or do you want tippy top dps in a sorc and flipping a coin on whether they're a good random player, or a bad one, and having to rez them every 10 minutes? Playing a dps caster really requires some calculating skills.

    EQ1 really did a good job with the rogue class imo. We had an open lock skill, and it was needed in some very key areas to open doors/vaults etc. Rogues made their own poisons with a large list of recipes, some were quite useful to stun/slow/debuff etc. They also had some great rogue only weapons with useful proc dots etc. like slow and snare. Gear imo should make a BIG difference in dps. In VG it didn't seem to matter quite so much. Between 2 players who really knew their class, a rogue in VG could have the best weapon in the game versus a rogue with a step below that and it still seemed like it was just a coin flip most of the time on who would top who. The same with casters. I hope gear really makes a consistently noticeable difference. It makes getting UR item X alot more meaningful.

    In the big picture I could see a really well geared rogue matching and even out dpsing a caster/sorc, but I still have to give a sorc the edge in dps if both are well geared. That's my personal opinion, but that comes from playing games where rogues really had a larger pool of utilities. DDO as Goremarr pointed out really made rogues all they should and could be. I also like Europe's point about WoWs design the way class not mattering so much between the top dps classes as the player.

    Edit: Also rogues did OWN in pvp in VG, their stun gave them an almost insta kill. Sorcs had a big one shot nuke in falling star, but that could be resisted with the right gear. A sorc couldn't resist stun and their wasn't anything to make up for the HP difference, so that was a big advantage. Does it factor into raiding? No, but it was an extra advantage in VG to a rogue over a caster whether you personally like to pvp or not. It was a perk. To some, it was probably a HUGE perk, one that far outweighed being slightly 2nd in the dps tier.
    Last edited by s33kNDstroy; 05-15-2010 at 03:11 PM.

  12. #12
    Rift Master Faelor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Omaha, NE
    Posts
    605

    Default A Message About Damage Dealing . Love, Faelor.

    [Wrote this a few hours ago, hopefully this discussion hasn't moved too fast! Oops...]

    Since day one of when I picked up EverQuest, the whole "this is the class to do the most damage" concept never stuck with me. Doesn't matter the game or their so called damage tier system, I don't see the reasoning to put one class on top of the pedestal.

    A lot of people try to make their case with no strings attached, but there always are even if unintentional. Such as high burst. If you have a high burst, does that mean you want a class to do nearly their max amount right from the get go? Constantly dishing out high amounts of damage?

    The "raid game" has changed a lot over the years. The days of tank and spanks, while by no means are existent, are done in terms of that being every encounter in a game. Now you have scripts instead of sitting at the backside of a mob (though sometimes they aren't so different, but that's another discussion). You have phases where your attention needs to be put elsewhere besides that mob's lovely rear; moving to a new location, damaging a target to a certain amount and or a certain time limit, interrupt rotations, stopping damage due to a debuff, taking out hordes of adds, etc. Asking to always have a high output while still maintaining the highest sustained damage per second is a bit ridiculous in this day and age. At least in terms of a single class or spec.

    If X is the top sustained DPS;
    1. How long should, on average, it take to be considered the top sustainable damage dealer?
    2. Does every other class have a resource pool that is fully exhaustible or require big enough breaks (ex; regenerating mana)?
    3. What kind of resource pool does X have to make it so sustainable? Why does no other class have the same or similar system in place? If so, why isn't it as effective?
    Point 3 in my eyes is the biggest factor in terms of "why". What makes the class obtain that position and why is no one by their side?

    [This post is kinda half done, sorry!]
    w w w . F A E L O R . c o m
    Administrator of Rift Seekers | [former] Guild Master of <Primal> | Administrator of Halcyon Affinity
    Rift Podcast | Rift Seekers is currently dormant for various reasons, thank you for understanding | Telerapedia

  13. #13
    Rift Disciple s33kNDstroy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    196

    Default

    Another thing I miss about rogues from EQ1 is safefall. That was just one more cool unique ability they got that separated them from the other classes, and it was totally useful. For instance going into a zone like The Deep that had the invisible bridge with a looooong deadly drop to a beast filled cavern floor. Even tho people eventually figured out where the bridge was, and the safe spots to get across it, someone always fell to their death, it was almost a given. The only class that could get down the cavern, (survive the fall), to CR, was a rogue with safefall and stealth. Rogues could really save the day and be heroes sometimes.

    Also on raids where mobs used Gflux, rogues could sometimes be considered more valuable than a caster because they really had a better chance of surving. I love Gflux fights.

  14. #14
    Kak
    Kak is offline
    Soulwalker Kak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    24

    Default

    If rangers are positional MELEE DPS, then yes, that would be the class I play ;)

    I LIKE the benefits of stealth, and poisons, and lockpicks, and all that ... but I don't think that is the focus of the class, as rogues are NOT jacks of all trades, imo. We specialize in stealth and positional melee DPS in an MMO situation. (And even going back to pen and paper, rogues got their sneak attack bonus if they were flanking - and a rogue with a chain flail in a small area and lots of dexterity and the feat to allow multiple attacks of opportunity... the carnage was heavenly).

    Anyway, the way I see it, balance comes based on utility versus DPS. High utility classes (like bards) are always wanted. Low/no utility classes have to make up for that through DPS. Typically, a rogue is low utility (even in EQ1, where we had lockpicks and trap sense, they were ALMOST useless - all we did was DPS). We at least had a stealth system that worked. Vanguard... let's not go there, because everyone argues. Rogues and Sorcs in VG should've been equal in DPS, as they both had no utility, particularly at the raid level. Rogues had SOME prior to raiding, mez darts ******* OWNED (until they got nerfed) but beyond that... meh. And then when EVERY new mob in the game saw through stealth, it became a liability to be a rogue (as mentioned before - stealth was spotted from farther away than being visible).

    Anyway - everyone has their own viewpoint - my viewpoint is that rogues should be masters of dealing death - melee, positional, and using stealth to their advantage. All the other goodies - spread 'em around. If rogues get a poison system that we can use as "buffs" on everyone, then our utility goes up, and DPS should go down.

    DPS Tiers like Vanguard work, IF and ONLY if the devs stick to it. Instead, we have broken classes doing too much DPS, or too little, we nerf one and fix the other and now holy **** sorcs do 8500 DPS and rogues do 5500... while Warriors do 5000. NOT COOL MAN.

    And Europe.. you and I both know player skill and machine power (aka, lag) always play a big part in DPS. When you joined Trinity, I had to train you. Then they nerfed us, while we helped them do it. And since the Strength glitch existed, you with LESS strength than I did more damage - stupid broke *** game. Heh. Player skill is ALWAYS important. But a druid with mass amounts of utility should not DPS equal to a rogue, and a needed class like a warrior/cleric what have you should never be doing DPS on par with a specialized DPS class. So saying "in WoW, that warlock out DPSes the rogue in one guild, but the rogue does it in the other" isn't really equal - happened in VG too, I was top DPS in Trinity while a BARD was top DPS in other guilds (gogo exploits). Anyway, that doesn't fly with me - classes should have a specific role... if you specialize in DPS, then you should be higher DPS than a class that doesn't. Inside that tier, the variations can exist, but... you get the point.
    Kakarat - Rogues do it better. No, I didn't forget the last bit, we just do it better.

  15. #15
    Ascendant Europe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    East Lansing, Michigan
    Posts
    1,957

    Default

    I hate the pigeonholing of "okay, you are for doing dps. and you, you are for making sure he does that dps." It just makes player 2 the ***** of the relationship. I think that's bad design, because every player wants to blow things' faces up. Everybody likes the big numbers, satisfying quality of being able to directly influence the encounter, etc.

    It's the same with utility. It's ridiculous to say "okay, you are useful to everyone but yourself." or "here, you are just here to be helped by others." There's no reason a character shouldn't be able to synergize with other players. It should be a two way street.

    I think every class that does DPS should be *FOR* doing DPS. Obviously, you want to encourage a little more encounter complexity than "everybody DPS!" but that's why you spread the goodies (ie: utility) around.
    <a href=http://www.trinityguild.org target=_blank>http://www.trinityguild.org/images/signatures/rift/sig_final.png</a>
    I mean, I guess it would just be a guy who you know, grabs bananas and runs. Or, um, a banana that grabs things. I donít know.
    Why would a banana grab another banana? I mean, those are the kind of questions I donít want to answer.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts