Whole game feels clunky to me, it's using euro stuff without euro files. Boring parts of euro have been kept to keep it like euro, instead of realising euro wasn't perfect. This is completely different to euro, so fails to recreate it, and is held back by certain aspects of trying to recreate it. Here are my opinions that nobody probably cares about.
The addition of archer has made balance too difficult. They need to be distinguishable from wizards single target damage, or you may as well be a wizard. However, this means either archers will do too much damage, or wizards wont do enough damage to single targets. otherwise, there is not enough of a difference between the 2 to justify the archer class. Mir is a VERY simple game, it's simplicity was part of it's success. I'm not saying wiz are UP/OP or archers are UP/OP just that the very existence of both classes creates a HUGE balance issue that was never there..
Before it was 'does wiz do enough single/mass target damage to the others'. Now it is a case of 'do archers do enough extra damage in comparison to a wiz', and then you have got to try make both do relevant single target damage relation to warriors/taos the first condition makes this very difficult.
Quick example - Let's say Single target damage to a warrior needs to be around 100 to make the whole ranged / melee balance argument work. Now, if a wiz does 100, an archer needs to do 130 (just an example, 30 dmg is the trade off for wiz/archer). Archers are now OP vs wars. Let's now make archers do 100 dmg. they still need to do more than wizards, so wiz now do 70 dmg. Wizards now cant kill warriors, or any other class. So, let's make both do 100 damage, which they need to do in relation to warrior/tao/sin. Archers quit, they have nothing over a wizard o justify lack of aoe and shield. There are other things to consider ofc, but this is a VERY large part of the equation which is almost impossible to balance with the limited tools mir has.
I hope people can understand what I am writing. Simply put, mir wasn't designed to have 5 classes, none of the spells were designed for 5 classes. euro didn't have 5 classes. Yet you are trying to make it work with euro spells and classes. Euro spells and classes were balanced due to the fact it was designed for 3 classes. You can't apply that same model to 5 classes. I quit playing because of the lack of simple and accurate balance, I'm not saying I am right and all must agree, this is my opinion. . .
Warrior vs sin has similar arguments. I would have loved to have seen the server without archers/sins, and be a lowrate. warrior/ sin is easier to balance though, you have tankyness and damage to work on. wiz/archer just has AOE/single dps.
TL;DR too many classes for a euro clone. Needed to be completely reworked, or just had 3/4 classes. A slight lack of professionalism with updates and patches messing stuff up hasn't helped either. Mir worked off of the melee(war) vs ranged(wiz) vs utily(tao) balance triangle, now that doesn't exist.
I will be frank and say the main reason I didn't like it was that I now have a life, and when I played mir before I did not. Mir is much more fun if you can dedicate 40 hours+ a week to it, and not just 10-15 hours a week, but I believe what I wrote is a serious issue which contributed towards me not wanting to play any longer.
Good luck with the server! (Grant, not Todd typing this)
The addition of archer has made balance too difficult. They need to be distinguishable from wizards single target damage, or you may as well be a wizard. However, this means either archers will do too much damage, or wizards wont do enough damage to single targets. otherwise, there is not enough of a difference between the 2 to justify the archer class. Mir is a VERY simple game, it's simplicity was part of it's success. I'm not saying wiz are UP/OP or archers are UP/OP just that the very existence of both classes creates a HUGE balance issue that was never there..
Before it was 'does wiz do enough single/mass target damage to the others'. Now it is a case of 'do archers do enough extra damage in comparison to a wiz', and then you have got to try make both do relevant single target damage relation to warriors/taos the first condition makes this very difficult.
Quick example - Let's say Single target damage to a warrior needs to be around 100 to make the whole ranged / melee balance argument work. Now, if a wiz does 100, an archer needs to do 130 (just an example, 30 dmg is the trade off for wiz/archer). Archers are now OP vs wars. Let's now make archers do 100 dmg. they still need to do more than wizards, so wiz now do 70 dmg. Wizards now cant kill warriors, or any other class. So, let's make both do 100 damage, which they need to do in relation to warrior/tao/sin. Archers quit, they have nothing over a wizard o justify lack of aoe and shield. There are other things to consider ofc, but this is a VERY large part of the equation which is almost impossible to balance with the limited tools mir has.
I hope people can understand what I am writing. Simply put, mir wasn't designed to have 5 classes, none of the spells were designed for 5 classes. euro didn't have 5 classes. Yet you are trying to make it work with euro spells and classes. Euro spells and classes were balanced due to the fact it was designed for 3 classes. You can't apply that same model to 5 classes. I quit playing because of the lack of simple and accurate balance, I'm not saying I am right and all must agree, this is my opinion. . .
Warrior vs sin has similar arguments. I would have loved to have seen the server without archers/sins, and be a lowrate. warrior/ sin is easier to balance though, you have tankyness and damage to work on. wiz/archer just has AOE/single dps.
TL;DR too many classes for a euro clone. Needed to be completely reworked, or just had 3/4 classes. A slight lack of professionalism with updates and patches messing stuff up hasn't helped either. Mir worked off of the melee(war) vs ranged(wiz) vs utily(tao) balance triangle, now that doesn't exist.
I will be frank and say the main reason I didn't like it was that I now have a life, and when I played mir before I did not. Mir is much more fun if you can dedicate 40 hours+ a week to it, and not just 10-15 hours a week, but I believe what I wrote is a serious issue which contributed towards me not wanting to play any longer.
Good luck with the server! (Grant, not Todd typing this)
