I think LE for a long time had really decent class balance. There was always some ebb and flow in what was OP or UP etc, as is expected.
But there is a lot of design creep, and for me, the 1.0 release should mean all classes and themes should be brought up to feeling good to play. Runemaster and druid are so tight and well designed. Even if they are not strictly OP(atleast for most builds haha) they are just so modern and feel so good to play. Shaman is just so lame and limp. Weak, does not deliver on theme etc.
So for me, its one of the most important things for me. Crossing my fingers but not holding my breath haha.
I wonder if people talking about sexist stereotypes even when it has nothing to do with the reason realize it just exposes themselves as being sexists. Not everyone sees women as victims all the time. Anyway glad it got cleared up and looking forward to 1.0!
Just a quick clarification, is stuff like missing skills in Shaman, Rogue and Paladin(also skill tree for Healing hand) also expected for 1.0?
And also buffs to weak masteries (Shaman and Forge Guard) and confirmed reworks to skills (Ice Thorns and Tempest Strike) are they also slated for 1.0 ?
It’s not a real problem. Period.
It’s just a “side” or “extra” feature that will get the attention when it will be possible, and that will be after 1.0. I hope long after 1.0.
Not only there are other topics about it, the devs have explicit gave you all the answers you need to know but nothing satisfies you. Just move on. There are much more important things to the game than this
Still no uniques for Forge Guards? Even the ‘new’ runemaster has uniques that are beneficial for it specifically. Can’t find a single unique for Forge Guards seems like it is the only class currently that got no itemization love.
No i’m not talking about the set, smelters wrath is terrible and any semi descent unique with legendary potential is far better then what the set can offer…
I also find it strange that they provide exclusive previews to 3rd parties, that never had anything to do with Last Epoch.
I do however understand why they do it.
The regular LE fanbase will still be aware of this preview, while it will reach a whole lot of new people, that might not know about Last Epoch yet.
Especially with 1.0 launch being basically the single most important thing from a PR perspective that LE has done and will do, I get it, even though I don’t like it myself.
This is called artistic freedom. If they want to create a character as a man, they can. The rest of the world is so sick of this 1% American woke nonsense. If you don’t like it, don’t play it.
Also, without gender locking, they cannot create a valid backstory for the characters. Not a big problem for this game, but that’s why a lot of modern games are so shallow. Because the social and mainstream media forces their bullshit on games. that’s how we got Forspoken, Last of Us 2 and a bunch of other games that could have been good if the writers didn’t focus on bullshit. Fantasy video games should never reflect poilitical and social conditions. That’s their point, to take the player out of reality.
And please, if you do microtransactions, do them at 1:1 pricing. An ingame currency is 1 dollar. We don’t need the scammy psychological marketing that all modern games do.
no thats not what the game says. the game says you can play the rouge as a female. it isn’t saying rogues can’t be male. look at npc zerrick from chapter 9 for example. hes a rougue.
I’ll probably get some hate for this take but having gender-locked classes actually helps with the world building. You are not playing Baldurs Gate 3 where you are creating yourself, you are playing an aRPG where you embody a specific arch-type and start wreaking havoc using that arch-type. aRPG are fast paced games so transposing the player to that world is more difficult then in normal RPGs, in order to achieve this you can, for example, use historically accurate situations, like the fact that usually the close range combat or direct combat was done by man while woman where more used for assassinations or providing first aid on the battle grounds. A lot of fantasies use this trope where man are the front line and the woman are the archers or healers so as a game developer or a writer you can easily tap into this to help with the world building. I think Diablo 2 (and LE as well) did an awesome job at this, you are not playing AN assassin you are playing THE assassin so the story of the character is not some generic bull crap. You are not one of the 10000 assassins of the world, you are one specific assassin that has this personal story that can unfold as you play. Having the playable character be someone specific in the world provides a nice way to immerse the player more. In the end it’s not about what arch-type you attribute to that class, it’s a fantasy world so you can make women fight close range and man fight from afar, that’s not the point, the point is to anchor that playable character into the world as a specific person, not a generic face in a see of generic faces. Diablo 4 has classes that can be both man and women and (and even non-binary if I remember correctly?) and it’s generic as you can get because you are not playing THE necromancer, you are playing A necromancer.
Sorry for the long rant however this is not the first time I see posts like this that feel more like virtue signaling then constructive feedback and I hope by writing this people understand a bit more about why in some cases gender locked classes might actually help the game and the world it’s building.
As some famous internet person once said, a delayed game can be good however a rushed game will forever be bad. So I’m all for delaying if it means the game gets a more polished release.
What we really need is to balance it with the Athenian drachma. 1 unit in-game currency for 1 fistful of drachmas. That way, there is no predatory marketing tricks; there’s only straightforward Greek imperial coinage.
(By the way, if my suggestion is approved, EHG really need to use the drachma value from the 5th century BC, not the bull**** romans introduced after… Come on, EHG, don’t screw this up!)
Definitely not because you wanted that sweet launch money. It is all for us.