- Forums
- EverQuest II
- General Discussion
- Beast lord
Beast lordFollow
1 post
I want to see the return of the beast lord
Well the beastlord was just a class to dumb down the game a bit for the new generation in eq1 :)
PrometeusVaer,
as a former BL in eq1 I think that was not the truth at all. I played many classes, including 2-boxing a necro and a shammy, and BL was fun and a viable class. They had their strenghts and weaknesses just like any other class.
makes you sound like your trolling for an argument.
as a former BL in eq1 I think that was not the truth at all. I played many classes, including 2-boxing a necro and a shammy, and BL was fun and a viable class. They had their strenghts and weaknesses just like any other class.
Quote:
Well the beastlord was just a class to dumb down the game a bit for the new generation in eq1 :)
makes you sound like your trolling for an argument.
Nah, its just the fact, and i never said it was a boring class to play, i played one myself and had a blast.
But, the only reason they have put in this class was to appeal soloers to eq1 and to help new people have an easier time when not many people still played at the lower level.
Dont take offense by it, because it was in their dumbdown frenzy of EQ.
Luclin expansion was there to make thing easy to the new generation and those to come, what the hell do you think Paludal cavern was for :) Oh and have you ever been a puller in luclins zone ? like griegs end haha its a joke you can almost solo pull 70% of the zone with any class and if you have a luller, the whole zone.
Well that was what eq needed at the time, lets face it alot of older players had went away and they had to fetch new one. Its the same as the bone dancers in DAoC, its a class ment to be all powerful, hell at 63+ i was able to be the main tank/slower in the bastion of thunder as a beastlord. And during that time i was an important part of buff and good part of the dps, so dont come here telling me it was just a normal class, ask that to a warrior and check with him how many of these role he can fill in a group hehe.
Anyway it was a blast playing the class but i dont think its time to bring such a class in EQ2, we dont need the big canons yet to fetch new players.
But, the only reason they have put in this class was to appeal soloers to eq1 and to help new people have an easier time when not many people still played at the lower level.
Dont take offense by it, because it was in their dumbdown frenzy of EQ.
Luclin expansion was there to make thing easy to the new generation and those to come, what the hell do you think Paludal cavern was for :) Oh and have you ever been a puller in luclins zone ? like griegs end haha its a joke you can almost solo pull 70% of the zone with any class and if you have a luller, the whole zone.
Well that was what eq needed at the time, lets face it alot of older players had went away and they had to fetch new one. Its the same as the bone dancers in DAoC, its a class ment to be all powerful, hell at 63+ i was able to be the main tank/slower in the bastion of thunder as a beastlord. And during that time i was an important part of buff and good part of the dps, so dont come here telling me it was just a normal class, ask that to a warrior and check with him how many of these role he can fill in a group hehe.
Anyway it was a blast playing the class but i dont think its time to bring such a class in EQ2, we dont need the big canons yet to fetch new players.
I played warrior, necro and beastlord to 65. Tanking in BoT is easy. Both monk and ranger can tank too once the mobs are slowed enough. Try taking on a named in BoT or trash mob in GoD instanced zone where mob hits for 900++. A level 63 warrior/paladin/sk with good gear can do it while beastlord even in good gear will get pounded to dust even after slowed. My war tanked 900++ hitter (only 7.5k hp when fully buffed) for 4 hours there with only 1 dead. BoT is nothing compared to GoD. There is simply no comparison between a beastlord and a warrior when it comes to tanking. For normal grouping, bst provide good dps. However, when you go on raid, beastlord is among the lowest dps due to resists. With AEing named, pet will be gone long before the named is dead. For soloing, druid, wizard, necro and shaman are way better soloer than beastlord. So I'd have to say beastlord is just a normal class. If beastload has mitigation like scout class and a pet like conjuror, don't think it will be overpowered in EQ2.
when i was a noob i started with beastlord and i do think they are for the beginers, because after that i tryed some other classes and bst was by far the easyest to level and solo with.
My point exactly they never were intended for high level game since they bring near to nothing on raid. They were a solution for helping people to reach higher level soloing without too much complication.
In comparison, the Beastlord, Mage and Necromancers were all fairly evenly matched.
While the INT casters had better pets the BL has more HP and higher DPS.
That being said, I seriously doubt there are many things in BOT (other than named) that a decently equipped Necro couldn't solo.
I have a Gnecro lvl 24 and a VS Beastlord lvl 24. Between the two the Necro wins HANDS DOWN!
Please don't troll that the BL was a sop or dumb down.
And also, since when is it a dumb down simply becuase they changed the game with portals? I have played since just before Shadows of Luclin came out... I like the improvements.
I believe that the people at Sony/Everquest1&2 are decent people doing a very difficult job. You can't make all the people happy all of the time! If you can run for Senate!
At Fan Faire I spoke to a few of the DEVs and found out that not only do they code this stuff but they PLAY as well. Not as part of their job but for enjoyment.
Personally, I won't eat in an ethnic restraunt unless I see that ethnicity eating there... Same applies to Everquest... The DEVs play this game as well!
Too bad those nice people at Sony/SWG don't have the same dedication to their industry. I know this is NOT a SWG thread... Sorry, but I am still crying over the dismemberment of the wonderful game that SWG was.
THE COMBAT UPGRADE SUCKED!
Actually I should be thanking Sony/SWG for their incompetance, because now I have more time to teach my daughter how to play EQII.
While the INT casters had better pets the BL has more HP and higher DPS.
That being said, I seriously doubt there are many things in BOT (other than named) that a decently equipped Necro couldn't solo.
I have a Gnecro lvl 24 and a VS Beastlord lvl 24. Between the two the Necro wins HANDS DOWN!
Please don't troll that the BL was a sop or dumb down.
And also, since when is it a dumb down simply becuase they changed the game with portals? I have played since just before Shadows of Luclin came out... I like the improvements.
I believe that the people at Sony/Everquest1&2 are decent people doing a very difficult job. You can't make all the people happy all of the time! If you can run for Senate!
At Fan Faire I spoke to a few of the DEVs and found out that not only do they code this stuff but they PLAY as well. Not as part of their job but for enjoyment.
Personally, I won't eat in an ethnic restraunt unless I see that ethnicity eating there... Same applies to Everquest... The DEVs play this game as well!
Too bad those nice people at Sony/SWG don't have the same dedication to their industry. I know this is NOT a SWG thread... Sorry, but I am still crying over the dismemberment of the wonderful game that SWG was.
THE COMBAT UPGRADE SUCKED!
Actually I should be thanking Sony/SWG for their incompetance, because now I have more time to teach my daughter how to play EQII.
The Beastlord was enjoyable to play, and even though I started some alts during the famous "grind zone", I went back to the BST.
There is no doubt that they are not the most powerful class and do not have a specific role in a group. And if winning or end-game or raid is the goal of a player, then a BST may not be the best choice.
However, I enjoyed the versatility of the class, and had many options to play.
I guess I like my pets, hence the Conjurer. :)
(Sony: bring back Levitation)
There is no doubt that they are not the most powerful class and do not have a specific role in a group. And if winning or end-game or raid is the goal of a player, then a BST may not be the best choice.
However, I enjoyed the versatility of the class, and had many options to play.
I guess I like my pets, hence the Conjurer. :)
(Sony: bring back Levitation)
just precising some things about the BoT example.
What i was saying is the Beast lord was
Main tank
Main Slower
Main shaman type buff buffer
Only mana regen available ( but for items )
others were mage, necro, necro ( ok a little emergency mana there if trouble came )ranger and cleric.
And the group rocked through the competition, now replace him by any other class, it would never have worked.
I am just stating the fact, yes other class heal better etc, none solo as well in all king of situation. Sure the druid wizard can quad. but thats just one situation, dont ask yourself why there is 10 time as many beast lord as any other class soloing from 1 to 65 :)
In EQ2 any class can go solo, but a beastlord in eq unless you nerf him from what e was in eq1 would be overpowered.
Now if you just want a class named beastlord well whats the point. If it makes you happy calling your mage beast lord well do it. But a tanker, slower, buffer, nuker, doter, haster pet class wouldnt be well receive by all other pet class in eq2 i think :)
And you can claim all that you want that it was just a normal class, it wasnt it was meant to bring more people to the game and make it more accessible. And at that time it was what EQ needed, no one played on lower level zone anymroe so any new player needed an extra boost to pass through these levels alone. the zone were deserted.
So they made an all around class good at about everything, provided its starting location with a whole lot of quest, gave them the easiest zone to level in ( 1-27 in a couple hours without powerleveling involved ) and all sort of other zones with non aggressive thing to kill.
There is a reason its the only class from eq1 that hadnt survived. And i am pretty sure one day it will be added.
What i was saying is the Beast lord was
Main tank
Main Slower
Main shaman type buff buffer
Only mana regen available ( but for items )
others were mage, necro, necro ( ok a little emergency mana there if trouble came )ranger and cleric.
And the group rocked through the competition, now replace him by any other class, it would never have worked.
I am just stating the fact, yes other class heal better etc, none solo as well in all king of situation. Sure the druid wizard can quad. but thats just one situation, dont ask yourself why there is 10 time as many beast lord as any other class soloing from 1 to 65 :)
In EQ2 any class can go solo, but a beastlord in eq unless you nerf him from what e was in eq1 would be overpowered.
Now if you just want a class named beastlord well whats the point. If it makes you happy calling your mage beast lord well do it. But a tanker, slower, buffer, nuker, doter, haster pet class wouldnt be well receive by all other pet class in eq2 i think :)
And you can claim all that you want that it was just a normal class, it wasnt it was meant to bring more people to the game and make it more accessible. And at that time it was what EQ needed, no one played on lower level zone anymroe so any new player needed an extra boost to pass through these levels alone. the zone were deserted.
So they made an all around class good at about everything, provided its starting location with a whole lot of quest, gave them the easiest zone to level in ( 1-27 in a couple hours without powerleveling involved ) and all sort of other zones with non aggressive thing to kill.
There is a reason its the only class from eq1 that hadnt survived. And i am pretty sure one day it will be added.
Quote:
There is a reason its the only class from eq1 that hadnt survived. And i am pretty sure one day it will be added.
We can only hope not :)
True indeed, but considering EQ2 as alot more solo content to permit people going up in level in fun ways, if its ever added it will probably be a balanced class based on the original.
I do agree that leveling from 1-49 as beastlord is easier. However, from 49-65, no class can touch necromancer in soloing once the necromancer gets the spell Lich. Necromancer is way more powerful than beastlord in eq1, yet it is already in eq2. However, in eq2 necromancer is more like a magician in eq1. A lot of useful spells are gone. So if beastlord is going to be added, expect to be treated the same..:)
Also beastlord do not have higher DPS than magician and necromancer at high level. Not even close after level 50 in eq1. Beastlord's pet might do more damage but beastlord's melee + spells damage just cannot compete with magician nuke and necromancer dot. Necromancer at 65 with dot stacking can do 1-1.5k damage every 6 sec and still end the fight with 80% or more mana. Magician can use pet cani and rod to gain mana back way faster than a beastlord can. The magician with an epic pet is a killing machine until level 60++.
In your BoT's group, you have 4 dps classes ( 2 necromancer, 1 magician, 1 ranger). If you replace beastlord with a shaman or chanter with charmed pet, it would still work provided the ranger has good gear(ranger can generate a lot of agro fast). So I do not think beastlord is overpowered compare with other classes. It does make soloing and grouping at lower level easier. However, beastlord is not as powerful as you think it is once you go beyond level 60. Even shadowknight and shaman can solo better than a beastlord. Mob just hit too hard for your pet to tank even after slowed. This is where root and snare type of spells becomes bread and butter of soloing. Soloing 60-65 as beastlord is extremely slow since you cannot take on any of the even or red con mobs. You can only kill mobs 5-6 levels lower. At 60, snarer class like druid, wizard and necromancer can kite level 60++ mobs for 1-2% xp per kill. Once a druid gets the high level charm animal spell, he/she can pretty much kill none stop.
Also beastlord do not have higher DPS than magician and necromancer at high level. Not even close after level 50 in eq1. Beastlord's pet might do more damage but beastlord's melee + spells damage just cannot compete with magician nuke and necromancer dot. Necromancer at 65 with dot stacking can do 1-1.5k damage every 6 sec and still end the fight with 80% or more mana. Magician can use pet cani and rod to gain mana back way faster than a beastlord can. The magician with an epic pet is a killing machine until level 60++.
In your BoT's group, you have 4 dps classes ( 2 necromancer, 1 magician, 1 ranger). If you replace beastlord with a shaman or chanter with charmed pet, it would still work provided the ranger has good gear(ranger can generate a lot of agro fast). So I do not think beastlord is overpowered compare with other classes. It does make soloing and grouping at lower level easier. However, beastlord is not as powerful as you think it is once you go beyond level 60. Even shadowknight and shaman can solo better than a beastlord. Mob just hit too hard for your pet to tank even after slowed. This is where root and snare type of spells becomes bread and butter of soloing. Soloing 60-65 as beastlord is extremely slow since you cannot take on any of the even or red con mobs. You can only kill mobs 5-6 levels lower. At 60, snarer class like druid, wizard and necromancer can kite level 60++ mobs for 1-2% xp per kill. Once a druid gets the high level charm animal spell, he/she can pretty much kill none stop.
I don't know about not being intended for high level game. I recall they had this awesome AA ability that would fill everyone mana bars. I'd say for that ability alone people would take them on raids. They also have the spiritual line that stacked with KEI.
Recent Visitors: 135
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (135)
- Forums
- EverQuest II
- General Discussion
- Beast lord
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC