1st new class major issue I see.

[X-D]

Starting offense/defense.

The two arguably most powerful skills in the game. From what I see, they all are starting WAY to high, seems to be almost double the legacy classes. So I have to assume they will be maxing higher as well. (I do not believe they will max double).

I have to wonder if any thought was put into it? All the NPCs currently are essentially tuned to legacy skills so I see certain classes like enforcer/raider/fighter being essentially unstoppable in PVE...even moreso then very old rangers and warriors. And also making PVP later in the game more unlikely to happen.

But specially the starting ranges are off the charts, Somebody with no weapon skill or any combat skills at all but with say ranger max offense can reliably solo up to raptor. Personally I think these things should be tuned down on all the new classes...starting a PC should not be so easy.

[John]

I have played a mixed class and have observed no such boost.

There does seem to have been a bigger stat boost provided by classes. Or else I've been uncharacteristically lucky.

[hyzhenhok]

The two arguably most powerful skills in the game. From what I see, they all are starting WAY to high, seems to be almost double the legacy classes. So I have to assume they will be maxing higher as well. (I do not believe they will max double).

Why would you assume that? Seriously, why assume higher starting skills = higher caps? There's no logical connection there at all.

Brokkr has discussed some of the new classes having higher combat skill caps than previously available, but there was no mention of offense/defense being included in that. That seems unlikely, and I'm not even sure why raising the caps on offense/defense would be a concern given how it was already nearly impossible to train them once you'd reached a certain point.

Most of what you're seeing is just higher starting skills. The heavy/light combat classes are definitely stronger out of the gate than warrior/ranger/assassin were. This is on purpose and a good thing. The initial 3 to 5 to 10 days played grind of getting your PC basically competent wasn't fun or even difficult (unless you think time sink + having to resist boredom-induced risk taking = difficulty). That just skips you over the phase where you couldn't even fight basic wilderness monsters; hardly a loss if you care about interesting PvE. And you've reached the complete backwards conclusion on PvP; people are probably going to be more willing to engage in PvP knowing that the worst part of the upfront grind for a new combat character is gone.

And they haven't changed how combat skillups work at all, so I really have no idea why such an experienced player as you would be worried about a mass influx of hyper-skilled mega-warriors. New combat PCs will get to the middle-skill-level trap more quickly and easily, yes, but getting past it? That's still going to be rare.

[X-D]

hyzhenhok, Staff almost never talks about the hidden skills first off. So not having mentioned it means nothing. Second I assume nothing, playing now since the mud started what, 25 years ago, I assure you I KNOW the difference between a higher combat skill and higher off/def. Lets see if staff denies it. I assure you that the top three combat classes start with substantially higher off/def then any of the legacy classes that come as a close match. And max much higher as well.

And I do not know why you assume I am worried about about

a mass influx of hyper-skilled mega-warriors.

I am not.

off/def dynamics are far greater then you seem to think, even a couple points matters more then many points in a visible skill. And when you combine that with the -fact- that every single mob in the game is tailored to legacy ranges then that is an issue, both in the start of a PC's life and very late on.

Then, when you combine that with admittedly higher visible skills, you are telling me you do not see a balance issue here?

[hyzhenhok]

You stated in your OP that you're just assuming that the maxes are being raised because the starting values are higher. Are you actually basing it on something else? Otherwise, that's a big assumption that seems to play big role in your prediction that PvE is ruined.

I know the heavy combat classes' hidden skills start higher than a warrior's, but having tried one of them it doesn't feel like the game is broken; just that I've skipped the miserable first couple days played grind.

[Dar]

I dont know about offense/defense. But I swear I recall reading that weapon maxes and various skill maxes will be higher. Or am I misunderstanding things?

[BrainySmurf]

Weaponskills max higher for the new classes. I doubt offense/defense has been touched.

[RogueGunslinger]

If there's a difference it isn't more than a couple days played worth... And now as I say that I realize that a couple days played is fucking forever in any normal game.

[roughneck]

I would agree that it appears as though they have been given a boost. I haven't played one yet, but it does look like it from the PC's I see coming into the game. I don't think it's necessarily a problem, but will likely mean a bit of tweaking and re-balancing which will happen organically over time.

This actually brings some balance to the game in terms of new vs experienced players out of the gate.

Vets are fine starting out with low O/D because they know exactly which mobs to start on and exactly how to boost both visible and hidden skills at a much more efficient rate than beginners do. So, the changes give a newb a fighting chance and save a vet from a bit of a hassle in skill grind at the beginning.

But this is all pure conjecture, we don't know for IF the starting O/D has been boosted, and we certainly don't know exactly how much it's been boosted if it has.

[X-D]

You would be wrong Brainysmurf...I assure you.

Rogue, my guess is around ten days played by the average combat PC player. The brand new out of the box heavy combat PCs are easily matching or beating 10day+ legacy PCs in off/def right out the box. And again, I know how to tell the difference between that and normal combat skills so people can just leave that be.

As to the maxes not being higher, that would VERY much surprise me as again, over the many years of play I notice that staff tends to keep to a formula on these things. That being if X starts here then it ends that much higher as well.

Again, the issue for me is not the new class verses old class dynamic PC wise, as we will all eventually be new class. But the new class verses old class on what are now legacy NPCs. That and the annoyance in new class verses new class in certain combos when advanced...though that is likely something that can be overcome same as now.

Right now though, compared to any of the new classes I have seen the NPCs or HORRIBLY under powered...so, would it be easier to go through and change all the legacy NPCs over to new classes and balance them or simply balance the new classes some...I mean, I am only talking off/def here, I don't much care about the visible skills.

[hyzhenhok]

I think it's intentional and a good thing that combat specialist PCs are no longer entering the game as total scrubs. If there are particular NPCs we don't want 0-day or 5-day or 10-day PCs to be able to kill, surely those particular NPCs can be buffed if necessary.  If you're expecting scrabs and raptors and poorly trained/armored/equipped city NPCs to be buffed to the point where they're as dangerous to under-10-day combat specialist characters as they previously were, I think you're going to be disappointed.

As for whether the new classes totally break PvE by being able to massively surpass the previous potential of warriors and are able to solo ankhegs or something like that, color me skeptical until we actually see it happening.

[Harmless]

3 points to make here; caveat, I've never played a single new class, I mostly lurked in all the discussions of their creation and I have checked their helpfiles out.

1.) The heavy combat classes lack a significant degree of versatility compared to the other class groups; if they got an off/def boost equal to say a 5 day or even 10 day warrior, then that is a good thing as it balances out their lack of utility. On the flipside, I don't necessarily want my stealth/crime oriented character to also have a 10 days played with off/defense level, but starting with at least 5 days played with of grinding already done is AWESOME.

2.) The problem I see isn't with off/def itself but with how having higher off/def makes training other combat skills more difficult (definitely a known issue discussed before), especially if this affects branching.

3.) I doubt they raised the cap on off/def, but there probably was a functional cap on off/def previously since your weapon+other combat skills would often start to influence your offensive and defensive abilities at some point, and therefore make it a little harder for you to gain off/def, barring fighting unarmed, which in theory trained off/defense more purely than fighting with weapons +/- a shield.

Now, I have been told by experienced players that all my notions about how combat works are now wrong, despite being here regularly since 2007; I admit I kind of got lazy when it came to the hack and slash grind in the past half a decade, since that form of play WAS so unrewarding. I may take a new look at playing as bandits or assassins or thugs or soldiers now that there are these new classes, and to be blunt if there are greater starting skills, great. Now I'll be less upset when my hard-earned, Byn-trained Arm soldier gets carelessly thrown into harm's way and dies, and I might actually reroll as some of these story-driving character roles again (even though I have some hard-learned habits of caution that will be hard to break).

[JohnMichaelHenry]

I have not yet played any of the new classes yet either. But that goes to further illustrate the opinion I am about to give, and that is I would prefer not to start tweaking anything yet, as I believe it is too soon to know how the changes are going to affect play.

[BrainySmurf]

You would be wrong Brainysmurf...I assure you.

Allow me to be more specific. I doubt offense and defense CAPS were adjusted the same way that weaponskill caps were adjusted. There is no way for you to know this as it would take at least a month and a half (40 days played) of dedicated boxing wildlife with heavy bags of rocks to maximize these stats previously with zero distraction or focus on any other roleplay aspect. The new classes have not existed for that long. The hypothesis is entirely founded on your belief that the cap shifted upwards as well as the initial starting point, and there's no evidence yet for that.

[Dar]

No one on this thread knows how is it codedly. Until brokkr responds to this, X-Ds points stands until assured otherwise. No guesswork based on experience will be good enough argument.

XD how is it you were not part of the beta test. Someone should have killed your character earlier

[Scrumpkin]

I have not played one of the new classes yet, but I have trained against the new classes I'm assuming, and they are tough coming out of the box it seems.  This could easily mean that yes, their off/def are higher.  Is that a bad thing?  In my opinion no, I'd like to see some randomness of tough newbies.  I do highly doubt that the maxes have been increased over 100%, assuming they were at 100%, but then again, my assumption is based on what I have seen from a view other than playing the new class, or classes.

[Wday]

I believe I can see it. Notice and watched characters start really buff like, and seems the old grind to become who you are is gone.

[Brokkr]

X-D is not entirely wrong and not entirely right.

First, let me preface this all by saying the intent all along, given an aging population of players and numerous points of feedback we have received over the years, was to make starting out somewhat easier and less of a grind.  This goes beyond combat to other areas of expertise...crafting for heavy merchantile and survival skills for the survival classes.

There isn't a simple answer for this, because different classes have different starting points, just like warrior, ranger and assassin had different starting points.

The Soldier class has the same starting point as Warriors did.  Scout and Infiltrator are most similar to Ranger and Assassin, just a handful of points higher on their weakest component.

The Figher class is several points stronger in Offense and Defense than the Soldier is, the increases being equally balanced.  Something that could be gained in a day or less of play, depending on how much combat and the nature of the combat one engaged in.  The Raider and Enforcer classes are marginally better in their weak component than Scouts and Infiltrators, respectively, with a larger increase than Fighters get in their stronger component.  The total number of points increase in total for Offense and Defense for the Heavy Combat Classes over their counterpart home advantage class in Light Combat is the same for all the Heavy Classes.

So...is X-D right or wrong?  For Heavy Combat, yes all the starting values are slightly higher.  For Raider and Enforcer weaker components, it is indeed double over Ranger and Assassin, but this is mainly due to the low starting points on the old guilds in those skills.  For everything else (actually for those too) it is an increase we routinely see folks put on it a day or two of playtime in active combat roles.

I may as well come out and say that there is another tweak that was included as well, that was done for the reasons I initially stated.  There are certain combat skills, like offense and defense, that increase at a certain rates.  For a warrior, those rates are comparable to the rates a Laborer learns at.  For ranger, those rates are between a Scout and a Stalker and for assassin those rates are comparable to a Miscreant.  Heavy Combat and in most cases Light Combat classes thus learn faster (just slightly) than one might be used to.  This may also be playing into what you are seeing, and both expected rate of increase as well as the so called skill plateau.

All that said, it is likely what you are seeing is the impact of weapon skills.  For Heavy Combat classes, with a location based weapon skill increase, weapon skills are just several points shy of what used to be (before we made a change last October/November that changed the scale) journeyman weapon skill.

Oh, almost forgot.  Max offense / defense hasn't changed, although it is likely the plateau point is higher.

[Dar]

Hey brokkr, question.  Do off/def skills even have different caps? O can they all reach 90 regardless of class, just at a different pace?

[Scrumpkin]

With change comes.........well, change!  I like the idea of coming out of the box with a bit more survive-ability myself.  I don't know how many times I have created a character concept I find fun, and maybe even an asset to the game, only to be killed by that lone Scrab or some other NPC.  Kudos.

Brokkr, your post is very transparent as to the reasoning and method of toughening up some of these classes from the start!  Thanks! 

[BrainySmurf]

For a warrior, those rates are comparable to the rates a Laborer learns at.  For ranger, those rates are between a Scout and a Stalker and for assassin those rates are comparable to a Miscreant.  Heavy Combat and in most cases Light Combat classes thus learn faster (just slightly) than one might be used to.  This may also be playing into what you are seeing, and both expected rate of increase as well as the so called skill plateau.

Maybe I'm misreading this, but does this mean legacy warriors increase offense and defense at the slowest rate amongst the legacy combat classes (Warrior/Ranger/Assassin)? All of my experience and testing was strongly suggestive of the opposite...

Edit: Tacking on, is there any intention of modifying the wildlife or expanding the wildlife of the game in response to these changes now that new classes aren't as squishy, in order to maintain old challenges and present new ones? I also point this out because the skill plateau you refer to is largely dictated not by one's self, but the efficacy of the opponents they fight, and not everyone plays in sparring clans where new-class characters can train with one another. If the wildlife remains unchanged, I predict indie new-classes will grind to a halt in their skill progression sooner, rather than later, crippling the sense of progression a lot of people play online games for.

[Brokkr]

Maybe I'm misreading this, but does this mean legacy warriors increase offense and defense at the slowest rate amongst the legacy combat classes (Warrior/Ranger/Assassin)? All of my experience and testing was strongly suggestive of the opposite...

You are misreading it.  Offense and defense, for any particular class, don't have to go up at the same rate.  The reason ranger reads slightly different is that it didn't fit the dynamic going on with warrior and assassin and was slightly overpowered vs them in terms of off/def skill gain.  That has been remedied, and there is a standard dynamic that applies across all the classes.

As for the second point, that would put us right back to where we started from.

[Dar]

Sigh. My question got scrolled over.

Would put a lot of worries to rest, one would think

[Brokkr]

Or I think I know the answer, but want to confirm before I post anything about it.

[Wday]

am I reading this wrong? or sounds like if you are in a old class system you will never reach a level of skill as the new? that the old caps off before the new ones? Should we ditch our PC's and start fresh to kinda be able to keep up?