Disclaimer: I'm not discussing social/RP goals, because that's independent of level/class/etc. I'm sticking with quantitative pursuits.

Empirically, we see that most characters with high kill rates and low death rates in the mid-levels are melee-based-- typically warriors, assassins, and rangers, with berserkers, thug-ish thieves, and APs somewhere in there. Less often, someone will be aggressive with a mage (invoker, transmuter are least rare), but they tend to die more often than the top-tier melee characters.

This is easy to understand-- if someone gets the drop on your sword-spec warrior, there's a decent chance you can hold off their melee, and flee if they go for high damage instead of lag. (And if they do lag you out, you might beat them. A surprising number of people insist on tripping themselves to death.) If someone gets the drop on your invoker, there's some chance you aren't getting a command in while you melee like a girl. Throw in the large edge in HP inherent to the classes, and it's much harder to 'blitz' sword spec guy.

I'm not saying you can't be PK-successful with every class, but generally speaking the guy who can manufacture clever ways to murder people with lowbie necromancer... can run up that kill count in half the time and a quarter of the losses with a melee build.

Back in the old days, the counter-argument (which I don't like, and can comment on if asked) was that melee types tended to suck at hero, so it was balanced by early strength. Lately, that empirically hasn't been the case-- for example, if I list the 25 deadliest characters now, there are 14 that can't cast/commune/sing, plus 6 more paladins/anti-paladins that are squarely in the hybrid realm. Most did most of their damage at the upper ranks. And while any player can name tough Fifth Age warriors, you certainly can't say that for every class.

This has a negative effect when the perception becomes "If I'm playing one of ~7-9 classes, my optimal strategy is to keep my head down and power-level.", for several reasons:

1) Power-leveling is monotonous, and can wear out one's desire to log on.
2) They try to remove themselves from PK, which reduces options for others.
3) If they don't see a group, they log off because they don't perceive anything to do. Even if leveling was first among other tasks (exploration, raiding, gathering items, PK stuff, etc.), they'd likely hang around, while groupmates might pop up.

(A compounding problem is that melee types are also desirable groupmates, so random low-level mage wants to power-rank but is wanted the least.)

My inclination is that the mid-level mechanical side of the game would be more interesting if:

1) Melee classes 'matured' slower. My bias is that Dual Wield is a sensible target here.
2) The 7-9 classes I mentioned get upgrades in the lower ranks. I think we've come part of the way-- low-rank shifter is a lot better, the newer Spellcraft is kinder to midbies, more midbie-ish wands and other devices exist, transmuters are more viable early, unempowered people have some punch that lasts into the 20s at least, etc.

Both of the above ripple outwards, of course. If you beef up all the mages/etc., PvE (*) gets easier, and if you're not careful you end up skewing the hero ranks as well. Conversely, as you slow down melee types, PvE gets a little harder, although other classes look more attractive as groupmates.

It's not an easy problem, but I can say that the majority (but not all) of the staff I've run this past lean towards some kind of action being good for the game. In particular, it would be nice to be able to tell new players "Play whatever seems the most fun for you." without having to add "Although you might find it a good bit harder." You see a lot of people on the New Player forum with the mindset "I play necromancers.", and telling them "Don't, for now." rarely goes over well.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

(*): Player vs. Environment-- ranking, exploring, gathering items and money, etc. Things you could do if you were the only person on.