Why is it class based?

[Ratstomper]

Originally Posted by Littleman

The flaw with open choice systems is that there is always the optimum setup, and somehow restricting options as one makes choices defeats the purpose of free-form setups and actually begs the question of why not going with a class system anyway?

This times 1000.

In PS1, you had people running around in rexo armor with an armor rapair tool on one side and a medical applicator on the other and a heavy weapon + AV strapped to their back. High BR troops could attack a hallway, kill infantry and MAXes, pull back, heal themselves completely and go right back into the fight as if nothing happened.

Classes force people to focus on certain aspects of the game instead of allowing everyone to just take the most practical choice and not have to deal with teamwork. That sounds like a bad thing, but it really isn't. You can have your cake and you can eat it, you just can't eat it with a rocket launcher if you're an engy.

[Maticus]

Originally Posted by Ratstomper

This times 1000.

In PS1, you had people running around in rexo armor with an armor rapair tool on one side and a medical applicator on the other and a heavy weapon + AV strapped to their back. High BR troops could attack a hallway, kill infantry and MAXes, pull back, heal themselves completely and go right back into the fight as if nothing happened.

Classes force people to focus on certain aspects of the game instead of allowing everyone to just take the most practical choice and not have to deal with teamwork. That sounds like a bad thing, but it really isn't. You can have your cake and you can eat it, you just can't eat it with a rocket launcher if you're an engy.

I believe this hit the mark. Class system promotes team work and less lone wolf game play. I was skeptical at first because I was so used to how it was in Planetside 1. How ever you don't have to restrict yourself to just one class, you can pretty much play all roles with out having to recert or do some craziness.

[Ratstomper]

Originally Posted by Maticus

I believe this hit the mark. Class system promotes team work and less lone wolf game play. I was skeptical at first because I was so used to how it was in Planetside 1. How ever you don't have to restrict yourself to just one class, you can pretty much play all roles with out having to recert or do some craziness.

Exactly. I felt the same way when I first heard classes were in PS2. In a way, it's actually less restrictive because you don't have to go forget certs in order to get others. It's as easy as putting points where you want them and changing at a station. The tradeoff is you just can't do every awesome thing at once and that's for the better.

[Bags]

It's class based so the bads don't get confused and so it looks more like battlefield.

[Ratstomper]

Originally Posted by Bags

It's class based so the bads don't get confused and so it looks more like battlefield.

Oh, bags. You're irascible.

[sumo]

i can only assume that what OP want is that he/she/it can use a handheld minigun while having a sniper and a rocket launcher as backup, jetpack and ability to heal and repair not to forget stealth ability also.

my guess for classes would be balance.

[GreatMazinkaise]

Originally Posted by Bags

It's class based so the bads don't get confused and so it looks more like battlefield.

This plus it's easier to balance distinct classes against each other. Those are the only reasons.

[Karrade]

Originally Posted by Kezz

You can swap between classes anytime you want, yes. At a gear terminal, AFAICT. Which is more liberal in terms of allowing you to change your certed role than PS1. But you are confined within the straitjacket of whatever class you are at a given point. Which artificial restriction is aggravating to many: see the proliferation of "hybrid" class choice availability in most games; players want to be able to tweak their abilities to the way they want to play, not be restricted.

Why is specialisation good? Why is Jack-of-Trades not a viable choice?

Classes don't extend the life of the game, available skill picks do. Doesn't matter whether the usability of that skill pick is limited by an arbitrary selection of other skills/equipment that can/have to be used along side it, or not.

Forcing people into classes does zip all to promote teamwork over zerging. The zerg will still cert into Assault/Max and not stand still for the Medics/Engineers to heal/reconstruct them. And they'll be Light Assault so the Medic has zero chance of keeping up because he's got no jetpack. Teamwork is promoted by dynamics, not static choices like classes.

Why is "Defined Roles" better?

Sure it's easier to balance things if you don't have to worry about "killer combinations" that you didn't think of. To an extent. That's why it's a lazy approach to design. Checks and balances should be built in to the dynamics of the game.

Good, well made points .

The move as someone summed up better than me, is to move away from one or two setups dominating. People learn, and when people learn they pick the best certs, in PS1 this meant a few certs were the norm. At least with classes, you'll get maybe (hopefully) a few for each class. On my return, I even heard people on TR CR5 stating what weapons are standard loadout for new folk.

This is what they want to move away from, one or two cookie-cutter builds, to make things more interesting/dynamic.

From what i've seen so far there is much more customisation than before, so I have no concerns about being able to customise, as I like to as well. Hence my happiness at anything moving away from one or two character builds.

-edit
I will amend the zerg point - classes supporting each other makes zerg weaker and outfits stronger, I am all for this. It does encourage teamwork, by rewarding it more.

[Kezz]

Too many posts to address individually. I'll take this one as an exemplar:

Originally Posted by Ratstomper

This times 1000.

In PS1, you had people running around in rexo armor with an armor rapair tool on one side and a medical applicator on the other and a heavy weapon + AV strapped to their back. High BR troops could attack a hallway, kill infantry and MAXes, pull back, heal themselves completely and go right back into the fight as if nothing happened.

I never said PS1 was perfect. Far from it. Support roles are underserved, and there is a cert cap. But that doesn't mean that you can't conceive of a way to incentivise teamplay over lone wolfing without forcing classes on people.

Those high BR troopers with Rexo (Heavy Assault, in the new parlance) self heals and weapons to address both hard and soft threats (HA again), let's say there are 5 of them. If you design your system so that the team that takes 4 guys in Heavy, and a medical specialist (however that's defined) has an advantage over the team with no corpsman along, you don't need to straitjacket people into classes. So the "some inefficient self heal" types are better suited for jobs like the current "entry hack", where resistance is sporadic and the team possibly scattered, but less well suited than a tight "Corridor bustin'" team with a combat medic to CQB.

Classes force people to focus on certain aspects of the game instead of allowing everyone to just take the most practical choice and not have to deal with teamwork. That sounds like a bad thing, but it really isn't. You can have your cake and you can eat it, you just can't eat it with a rocket launcher if you're an engy.

The point is that a good skillframe system makes the "practical choice" a matter as much of taste and context as anything. Part of that context is "will I work in a team". If working as a team makes the practical choices different, and results in a better outcome for the team members, then teams will form. Whether it's class based or not. How obvious it is that the outcome is better will determine how strong that tendency is. In PS1, there is no obvious benefit in terms of short term outcomes (particularly once XP is irrelevant) to team play, and that's a weakness; that BR25 characters have no incentive to Squad up, unless they want CR, is an emphasis on that.

Edit:

Oh, and this:

Originally Posted by sumo

i can only assume that what OP want is that he/she/it can use a handheld minigun while having a sniper and a rocket launcher as backup, jetpack and ability to heal and repair not to forget stealth ability also.

If that is the extent of your ability to imagine other peoples' motivations, then you need some help. And you have my pity. There, there. Oh, and your reading skills need some work too.

[Greenthy]

The main reason I think classes are in PS2 where they weren't in PS1 is:
It makes the game a lot more accessible for new players.

Not only because it's easier to understand and no need to fiddle with inventory (one part I will also miss in PS2), but it makes the playing field even more plain for newcommers to come in.

[Kalbuth]

The way I see it :
A freeform system permit overpowered setups and optimal combinations, ending up in a copy-cat game where everyone does the same.
To avoid this, in the process, you need to create limitations.
And here is the killer for SOE : these limitations will prevent their player to continue their caracter development once they reach the limitation, thus will make player stop buying for their caracter, because they'll hit the limitation
putting in a zero limit development system, and a limitation on top of it (ie, a class system), resolves the problem.

It's a marketing decision.

[PilotJack]

Originally Posted by Kezz

"Why, oh why, oh why?"

I've seen a few reasons offered in the meeja that are available for watching, but they're all BS. AFAICT, it's "Because other shooters have classes."

Classes are the scourge (along with "level-based progression" (by which I mean you get tougher and better every time you get a "level"), but it doesn't look like they're falling into that trap) of "development systems" in any game. They're a lazy excuse for wooly thinking.

Because it seems SOE would rather cater for those who play COD, BF3 etc, rather than their own subscribers who have put so much time, and money into their game. It feels entirely like the PS1 players have been given a back seat. Looks like one hell of a game, but damn classes suck.

[Ratstomper]

Originally Posted by Kezz

Too many posts to address individually. I'll take this one as an exemplar:


I never said PS1 was perfect. Far from it. Support roles are underserved, and there is a cert cap. But that doesn't mean that you can't conceive of a way to incentivise teamplay over lone wolfing without forcing classes on people.

Those high BR troopers with Rexo (Heavy Assault, in the new parlance) self heals and weapons to address both hard and soft threats (HA again), let's say there are 5 of them. If you design your system so that the team that takes 4 guys in Heavy, and a medical specialist (however that's defined) has an advantage over the team with no corpsman along, you don't need to straitjacket people into classes. So the "some inefficient self heal" types are better suited for jobs like the current "entry hack", where resistance is sporadic and the team possibly scattered, but less well suited than a tight "Corridor bustin'" team with a combat medic to CQB.


The point is that a good skillframe system makes the "practical choice" a matter as much of taste and context as anything. Part of that context is "will I work in a team". If working as a team makes the practical choices different, and results in a better outcome for the team members, then teams will form. Whether it's class based or not. How obvious it is that the outcome is better will determine how strong that tendency is. In PS1, there is no obvious benefit in terms of short term outcomes (particularly once XP is irrelevant) to team play, and that's a weakness; that BR25 characters have no incentive to Squad up, unless they want CR, is an emphasis on that.

Perhaps I'm not sure exactly what you mean, but...

If you've got two teams of 5 HA and one from one of the teams has some sort of medical capabilities, then yes, that team is stronger. That medical certed soldier himself is also more viable tactically than every other HA on both teams individually. If an outfit or a regular group of friends wanted to make a team where everyone had a specialization and ran with it all the time, it would be fine. However, this isn't the case. If everyone can cert for healing and retain their combat effectiveness, why only make one person cert it? Just have all 5 HA on each team cert it and noone has to worry about healing anyone else. THAT is what they're trying to stop.

Now if said team or outfit wanted each member to have it's specialization, they still can within the class system. They can pick the class that best represents what they want to do and customize certs from there. However, the guys who just want to take all the certs can't use them all at once and it forces them to rely on teamwork, which improves overall immersion and fun gameplay.

[SixShooter]

Originally Posted by Ratstomper

This times 1000.

In PS1, you had people running around in rexo armor with an armor rapair tool on one side and a medical applicator on the other and a heavy weapon + AV strapped to their back. High BR troops could attack a hallway, kill infantry and MAXes, pull back, heal themselves completely and go right back into the fight as if nothing happened.

Classes force people to focus on certain aspects of the game instead of allowing everyone to just take the most practical choice and not have to deal with teamwork. That sounds like a bad thing, but it really isn't. You can have your cake and you can eat it, you just can't eat it with a rocket launcher if you're an engy.

Totally agree. The abilty for one guy to be completely self sufficient does nothing to promote teamwork, it does the opposite. It promotes lone wolves where having classes means that there is going to be someone else that has an abilty that you might need that you don't have yourself thus promoting teamwork.

[diLLa]

Same reason why there are distinct classes in RPG games.

Imagine playing world of warcraft and being able to tank the boss, do the most dps to the boss and being able to heal yourself during that.

Completely destroys the purpose of the game. You would never ever need something else. You would just need a full party of copies of yourself, thus reducing teamplay and variety.