killspree: That is what I was referring to, yes. I wasn't aware that it was taken out. The damage had been done, though. I'm glad future druids won't have to suffer that 14-29 hell. Although boosting the power of the NK guards certainly sucked for 24-27...
To step more into the vague, overall sense of balance...
My view on balance (in a group, where it matters) revolves around the following:
1. In a group consisting of one melee, one priest, and one pure caster, ANY non-duplicate class should be desirable. Duplicate classes should be a worthy 2nd choice. Basically while you might not want two of a class, you certainly shouldn't be passing on multiple classes because their abilities are already covered.
2. In the progression from levels 1-X, a sense of balance should exist for what classes would be valuable in a group. In the generic group mentioned above, the 4th group member could be anything and still be useful. Obviously certain mobs demand a more specialist party, but general hunting should remain open to every class. The ONE exception to this is where a player can solo effectively, in which case it is still balanced until level X.
3. No item should ever replace a group member or make grouping less desirable. This includes twinking caused by not having level limits on items.
4. Death should be equally painful for all classes. This obviously follows the idea of uniform xp levels. It also means the allowing of any class to bind anywhere.
5. Every class should have something unique to offer a group.
6. Soloing does not apply negatively to balance. The ability to solo effectively should only exist when the ability to group effectively is low, and vice versa.
|
Threaded Mode
