Best Of
Re: Fixing the Class system
No. It's assinine to claim that Intrepid will change course to adopt your vision of what the game design should be.When I say "I Think we will get X" rather then "The design calls for X" that is me explicity saying that any discrepancy you might find with my statement and the design is me claiming that Intrepid will change course, downscope etc. Trying to pound the table with 'The design' is assinine in a thread that is all about percived flaws in or inability to deliver on the design, particularly in an acceptable timeframe, as written.
You can do what you want. I will respond the way I respond, but...
I try to stay out of threads that are just about wishes and fantasies, like the "What are your 'class fantasies' for the 64 classes" thread, since that's not a discussion about changing the current design.
But, you should expect to get quite a bit of pushback in a thread where you are pushing for changes in the Ashes game design for features that have not yet been tested.
Especially when you start a topic proclaiming to fix a feature that is not yet broken.
If you are going to start suggesting "fixes", you should at least be able to post accurate representations of the known game design.
Dygz
1
Re: Is no one else disappointed that "Persistent Alpha" AKA 24/7 Alpha 2 access isn't until May 2025?
People are allowed to be upset about anything.patrick68794 wrote: »People that have paid are allowed to be upset at the numerous delays and the poor communication surrounding those delays.
Being upset about delays is irrelevant. Being upset about poor communication is probably irrelevant as well.
Feedback might be valid, but...patrick68794 wrote: »Their feedback about that is valid and Intrepid should be listening to them, even if they ultimately decide not to make any changes based on that feedback. Intrepid doesn't want people senselessly defending them or insulting other people for providing criticism either.
Game devs used to be gamers, too. Especially for Intrepid, Steven pretty much only hires gamers with MMORPG dev experience, specifically. Just because they listen and sympathize does not mean they are able to accommodate gamers' hopium.
Not sharing your entire perspective is not the same thing as senseless defense.
Apparently, you have not worked in game development, specifically.patrick68794 wrote: »Now you can take whatever intentional misinterpretation of that that you want and go to town with it. If you want to think I'm upset personally then go right ahead. If you want to think that I don't know how development works go right ahead. Just know that you'll continue being wrong, just like the other people that have made the same idiotic, baseless assumptions. I'm done discussing this.
If I'm mistaken, please share a couple of video games you have successfully released.
"I'm not personally upset... just the people who disagree with me are wrong, idiotic and making baseless assumptions, so I'm out! QQ"
Bye, Felicia.
Dygz
1
Re: Consternation surrounding the 8x8 Class system and how to move forward.
But you think we don't get a little impatient with newbies dropping in to rehash their concerns about a design they have barely researched and have not yet seen in action or tested?
If you want to play some other game system you like better than the Ashes design - go play that game system.
You talk an awful lot about "critical thinking skills" for someone who clearly has none.
There is no Augment system in Ashes of Creation. There is no Ashes of Creation. What there is is a game in development and a series of increasingly vague, ever changing statements from those developers about what they imagine their game will be. The point of having an Alpha 1 and an Alpha 2 and forums and a discord for people to talk in is so that they can discuss the systems that the developers have implemented and provide feedback. The augment system is still a ways off and there is plenty of time to have a conversation about that the players and the developers expect from the system. Nothing is written in stone, its an ongoing process.
I respect the vision that the developers have for the game. I think that they have shown us slow, but steady progress. As long as they continue to ask for and respond to feedback from players I plan on sharing my thoughts and feelings about the systems they propose and implement.
You seem to have some sort of misguided belief that since you were here FIRST, you have status over other people who only recently became involved in the process. You are misinformed. Have the humility to recognize that you don't know everything, you aren't an expert on anything, and everyone else who is here has just as much of a right to express their ideas as you do.
Rippley
3
Re: Another Approach to Handling Subclasses' "Flavor" Problem
Each Secondary Archetype has 4 Schools of Augments.
"School" implies that each School has several Augments - and Schools are likely to act similar to "trees" in regard to progression.
That's my suspions as well.Prior to 2020, the design included skill point allocation for Augments.
As of 2020 and 2022:
"There are no plans for players to use their skill points for Augments. That's a seperate system."
---Vaknar
How dose one progress through a tree without using 'points' to unlock the nodes? If it's just a seperate kind of point "Augmentation points" lets call them then it sounds like a distincion without much of a difference.
Also this raises the question if lvl cap is 50 and that means 50 skill points then the current base archetype trees simply arn't large enough as they average 35 nodes. So do we stop earning skill points at 25 and instead earn an Augmentation point each level?
This sort of change from Intrepid is why we're all mostly agreeing with your basis for concern, even if not your conclusion.
Anyway, no, Augmentation seems to be just 'all at once' if you wish it, with level limits (ugh!) on when and how you can augment SPECIFIC skills... maybe.
Though, to be fair, I don't really want the Throne and Liberty version (earn Augment points when you level, spend them on individual skills as you go) in Ashes either. I believe that if we have to wait until level 25 to Augment, I would want them all at once so I can embody my class fantasy immediately.
(for clarity, I disagree with waiting until level 25 to start secondary Archetype Augmenting).
The base Archetype trees are supposed to get bigger. Probably.
Azherae
1
Re: Fixing the Class system
George_Black wrote: »They dont work.
Look at eso and aa.
If your refering to ArcheAge, all evidence points to devs taking inspiration from it (like a lot of the class names are lifted from it). So while you might not like it your likely howling into the void if your arguing for the game to not be 'like that'.
Some of the class names they chose are good, some are honestly trash. They should go back and change ones that have the same name in them over and over, like "spell", "sword", and "night".
Especially Spellmancer, because the suffix "mancer" means they specialize in something. So you specialize in "spells", really?
They can use ArcheAge, DAoC, etc to get ideas, but yea, some of those need to change. And Tank is obviously massive cringe but that goes without saying.
Re: Mega Dungeons
Upper Guk was Frog-loks to about from 20-30.
Lower Guk was split between Frog-loks and undead Frog-loks and went from 35 to 50.
Kind of the way original WoW Blackrock Depths went 46-58+.
Lower Guk was split between Frog-loks and undead Frog-loks and went from 35 to 50.
Kind of the way original WoW Blackrock Depths went 46-58+.
Endowed
1
Re: What is the definition of "Flavor" in reference to the secondary augment system?
This is one of the key aspects of the game that I'm still waiting to see before actually deciding if I will play the game or not.
From what I've got, Augments will not only change the visual appearance, but also how certain abilities work.
As a counter to the reply above mine, I'd say it could actually impact your class more than you think (here's me being optimistic).
No, it won't change your Fighter from a melee dps to a ranged dps, the core will remain the same, which is the key part, but it surely will give you more variety.
Using the same Charge into Teleport example. Those 2 abilities won't function the same. It's not just a visual tweak.
Teleport makes you appear at a certain location, it's almost instant.
Charge has some travel time. It's a subtle difference, but also functionally a pretty significant one.
If we apply the same to other abilities, I'm hopeful it will make enough of a difference as charge will take longer, and you can be cc-ed on your way to your target.
Fighter + Mage could in reality play like a melee magic dps, that has more mid range abilities than your default Fighter. Maybe focusing more on the elements, whirlwind maybe procs electrocute, etc.
As long as there's a good visual difference, and as long as there is a lot of customizability, I'll be happy.
I'm absolutely positive that functionality of abilities will be changed to some extent as well, whether it's range, radius, attack type, added cc, procs, etc. and as long as we have that WITH visual changes, it's good enough.
Let's take Tank + Mage as another example.
They could have a magic shield, maybe some abilities turn into AoE magic spells (something like Vicious Implosion from Archeage would be a huge tool for engaging and grouping enemies). Think of Skullknight from Archeage.
Then another example would be Tank + Cleric.
Totally different, focusing more on survival, healing itself and maybe allies, maybe proccing heals on themselves as a defensive tool, better health regen, etc.
The only thing we can do is speculate, and believe what we've heard from Steven a few years ago.
I hope they don't abandon this idea, but I also hope they don't just half ass it, so that it has no real impact on gameplay, and I really hope it allows for a lot of customizability, rather than being limited in scope.
I hope this gets asked at the next live Q&A stream, its on the 30th. I'll post there now.