C.J. Ruggles

IMO direct equivalences aren't necessarily a good thing. There is no reason you can't achieve balance without direct equivalences, and as another poster mentioned, even games that do still struggle to balance classes.

Take for example EQ1 - where the classes and class / race combinations were largely formulated based on lore. This meant there weren't necessarily direct equivalences (although there were some) and each class felt unique.

Then in EQ2, they decided to design the whole system very logically and with direct equivalences - 4 archetypes, 3 classes in each archetype, and (pretty much) a good and an evil sub-class in each class. Although I love the game, sometimes I feel like too many of the classes are samey - it is almost too well thought out.

I'd rather see more games with non-equivalent classes - give at least some completely unique abilities to the various factions and then spend the time to make sure, on the whole, they are balanced...

Yay Engadget!

....

Already pre-ordered my iPod Touch!

Go Engadget!

wuwu go Engadget!

Can't get through my morning without Endgaget!

None!

Custom built HTPC running Ubuntu / MythTV

HD-DVD drive