hybrids!

i remember a thing about hybrids being a possible possibilty, that in mind;

what hybrid playstyle/idea do you guys fiond the most interesting?:)
(mine is sum/tank and having a pet acting as tank or a tank/bard being able to minor buff its party:D)

i also posted this on discord for interests and giggles:3

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Sarevok

Damokles wrote: »

Sarevok wrote: »

Damokles wrote: »

Sarevok wrote: »

I'd be very interested to see how different a Dreadnought turns out vs a guardian or Knight. If dreadnoughts come out to be almost as strong DPS wise vs other melee classes but have more survivability with a shield/2h/dw then I might have found my class. I enjoy brawler classes and typically have to go down a tank path but then mix in a lot of DPS elements to reach that potential.

Well Dreadnaughts are still mainly Fighters. The real question is: are Fighters dps classes? If steven goes for the D&D approach, then they could very well be tanks.
I myself always see the classes this way: fighter/tank are enduring, rogue/ranger physical damage, mage/summoner magical damage, bard/cleric support.

Ah yes. The old D&D approach. I think the same way usually. Except bards are typically useless and are more for RPing than actually useful. 😜

Tell that my Bard/Rogue who charms ladies at night and slits his enemies throats at night ;D

Less throat slitting but what I imagine every Bard does.

https://youtu.be/u21ICe3f6oU

Damokles

ferryman wrote: »

Damokles wrote: »

Sarevok wrote: »

I'd be very interested to see how different a Dreadnought turns out vs a guardian or Knight. If dreadnoughts come out to be almost as strong DPS wise vs other melee classes but have more survivability with a shield/2h/dw then I might have found my class. I enjoy brawler classes and typically have to go down a tank path but then mix in a lot of DPS elements to reach that potential.

Well Dreadnaughts are still mainly Fighters. The real question is: are Fighters dps classes? If steven goes for the D&D approach, then they could very well be tanks.

I predict otherwise. Frontline melee damage dealers like fighters or warriors are generally quite popular and without having a single one in Ashes would be quite odd solution. In addition, the feel of the fighter has been more on direction of damage dealer rather than a tank.

Like wiki says: "The fighter is an expert in physical combat. A master of many weapons, this warrior strikes fear into the heart of his foes."

Moreover, tank has already its role in the class name which separates it from fighter. There is also Mage and Ranger as ranged damage dealers so Fighter would be quite obvious pair for Rogue. There is also Cleric as only healer why most likely one tank is enough as well. I guess that Fighter and/or Fighter/Tank can be played as a off-tank but generally taken the fighter will focus more on offence.

This is ofc my prediction, but tbh I would be a really surprised if Fighter would be a tank.

Yeah, but everything has to be balanced doesnt it?
If we go with your distribution we would either have:
-1 tank, 2 melee dps, 3 ranged dps, and 2 support
Or
-1 tank, 3 physical dps, 2 magical dps, 2 support

I would count the rogue as a frontline melee damage dealer btw.
Warriors would still be warriors. The only difference would be that they had abilities to mitigate damage or to fight battles for a long duration.
Enduring doesnt mean tank. Enduring means that they can keep on fighting for a long time without outside help.

mcstackerson

I think you have a problem with your distribution where it looks like you counted summoner as a ranged DPS class but it's supposed to be the jack of all trades.

For the fighter, besides doing melee damage/weapon mastery, only other attribute we really know about is they are supposed to be mobile.

In the past, the cleric also had a lot of close range offensive power. Not sure how it's changing but they are supposed to be the masters of life and death. Steven even mentioned in one of the PAX talks that we have only really seen the life side of the cleric.

As to OPs point, I'm usually a melee players so interested in all fighter combinations. I'm especially interested in none fighter primaries with a fighter secondary as I'd like to see how the fighter affects them. If it turns them more into a melee class, I see a lot of potential.

Ferryman

Damokles wrote: »

ferryman wrote: »

Damokles wrote: »

Sarevok wrote: »

I'd be very interested to see how different a Dreadnought turns out vs a guardian or Knight. If dreadnoughts come out to be almost as strong DPS wise vs other melee classes but have more survivability with a shield/2h/dw then I might have found my class. I enjoy brawler classes and typically have to go down a tank path but then mix in a lot of DPS elements to reach that potential.

Well Dreadnaughts are still mainly Fighters. The real question is: are Fighters dps classes? If steven goes for the D&D approach, then they could very well be tanks.

I predict otherwise. Frontline melee damage dealers like fighters or warriors are generally quite popular and without having a single one in Ashes would be quite odd solution. In addition, the feel of the fighter has been more on direction of damage dealer rather than a tank.

Like wiki says: "The fighter is an expert in physical combat. A master of many weapons, this warrior strikes fear into the heart of his foes."

Moreover, tank has already its role in the class name which separates it from fighter. There is also Mage and Ranger as ranged damage dealers so Fighter would be quite obvious pair for Rogue. There is also Cleric as only healer why most likely one tank is enough as well. I guess that Fighter and/or Fighter/Tank can be played as a off-tank but generally taken the fighter will focus more on offence.

This is ofc my prediction, but tbh I would be a really surprised if Fighter would be a tank.

Yeah, but everything has to be balanced doesnt it?
If we go with your distribution we would either have:
-1 tank, 2 melee dps, 3 ranged dps, and 2 support
Or
-1 tank, 3 physical dps, 2 magical dps, 2 support

I would count the rogue as a frontline melee damage dealer btw.
Warriors would still be warriors. The only difference would be that they had abilities to mitigate damage or to fight battles for a long duration.
Enduring doesnt mean tank. Enduring means that they can keep on fighting for a long time without outside help.

That is not my distribution. 1 Tank, 1 Healer, 2 Melee DPS, 2 Ranged DPS, 1 Support (Bard) and I am not sure where to put Summoner tbh. If there is one healer then one tank is also enough. Tanks are usually those which are less played and needed anyway. So I do not see why there would be two tanks, but zero warrior like melee damage dealers, it just not make that much sense.

Rogues are not quite at the same way frontline soldiers as fighters and warriors. Fighters usually can take more hit, wear heavier armor and spend more time amongst enemy lines. Rogues in other hand trust more on mobility, moving in shadows and attack by surprise but also vanishing when pressure is getting too high. That is the difference I was referring to.

I do not see a single reason why fighter would be a tank, but I see several why it would be a melee damage dealer like I have mentioned. I can see Fighter or Fighter/Tank as a off-tank but not same way main tank as the tank class. *

*And who is responsible of naming the tank class after a role? *facepalm*

Hexcat

But by hybrids do you mean:
The Class, which is the combination of two Archetypes
OR
A class that fits two separate roles (DPS/TANK/HEALER)

In my case,talking about classes, the first and main character will be a Predator (Rogue/Ranger) which will obviously be a full DPS and I'm planning on specialize it in PVP, because I'm going to take the Bounty Hunter title (I really want to say profession but as the wiki says, its a title)

And talking about a hybrid of roles i wanna try any of the two combinations of Rogue/Cleric (Cultist/Shadow Disciple), seems like adding the rogue archetype is what it takes to be in the "dark path" when we talk about classes, i can picture any of this two classes being like the shadow priest in WoW focusing on self healing wile be able to heal others

PD: Now that i think of it, I have always wanted to be some kind of "Inquisitor" in a game, you know, this character who is a zealot of his fate but can take some unorthodox paths in order to accomplish his/her gods will, hope any of the clerics archetypes offers something like that

skearnz

ferryman wrote: »

Damokles wrote: »

Sarevok wrote: »

I'd be very interested to see how different a Dreadnought turns out vs a guardian or Knight. If dreadnoughts come out to be almost as strong DPS wise vs other melee classes but have more survivability with a shield/2h/dw then I might have found my class. I enjoy brawler classes and typically have to go down a tank path but then mix in a lot of DPS elements to reach that potential.

Well Dreadnaughts are still mainly Fighters. The real question is: are Fighters dps classes? If steven goes for the D&D approach, then they could very well be tanks.

I predict otherwise. Frontline melee damage dealers like fighters or warriors are generally quite popular and without having a single one in Ashes would be quite odd solution. In addition, the feel of the fighter has been more on direction of damage dealer rather than a tank.

Like wiki says: "The fighter is an expert in physical combat. A master of many weapons, this warrior strikes fear into the heart of his foes."

Moreover, tank has already its role in the class name which separates it from fighter. There is also Mage and Ranger as ranged damage dealers so Fighter would be quite obvious pair for Rogue. There is also Cleric as only healer why most likely one tank is enough as well. I guess that Fighter and/or Fighter/Tank can be played as a off-tank but generally taken the fighter will focus more on offence.

This is ofc my prediction, but tbh I would be a really surprised if Fighter would be a tank.

i act had something ion mind about this! not fighter but rather cleric/tank
imagine being able to tank and hold aggro through healing spells xD

ferryman wrote: »

Damokles wrote: »

ferryman wrote: »

Damokles wrote: »

Sarevok wrote: »

I'd be very interested to see how different a Dreadnought turns out vs a guardian or Knight. If dreadnoughts come out to be almost as strong DPS wise vs other melee classes but have more survivability with a shield/2h/dw then I might have found my class. I enjoy brawler classes and typically have to go down a tank path but then mix in a lot of DPS elements to reach that potential.

Well Dreadnaughts are still mainly Fighters. The real question is: are Fighters dps classes? If steven goes for the D&D approach, then they could very well be tanks.

I predict otherwise. Frontline melee damage dealers like fighters or warriors are generally quite popular and without having a single one in Ashes would be quite odd solution. In addition, the feel of the fighter has been more on direction of damage dealer rather than a tank.

Like wiki says: "The fighter is an expert in physical combat. A master of many weapons, this warrior strikes fear into the heart of his foes."

Moreover, tank has already its role in the class name which separates it from fighter. There is also Mage and Ranger as ranged damage dealers so Fighter would be quite obvious pair for Rogue. There is also Cleric as only healer why most likely one tank is enough as well. I guess that Fighter and/or Fighter/Tank can be played as a off-tank but generally taken the fighter will focus more on offence.

This is ofc my prediction, but tbh I would be a really surprised if Fighter would be a tank.

Yeah, but everything has to be balanced doesnt it?
If we go with your distribution we would either have:
-1 tank, 2 melee dps, 3 ranged dps, and 2 support
Or
-1 tank, 3 physical dps, 2 magical dps, 2 support

I would count the rogue as a frontline melee damage dealer btw.
Warriors would still be warriors. The only difference would be that they had abilities to mitigate damage or to fight battles for a long duration.
Enduring doesnt mean tank. Enduring means that they can keep on fighting for a long time without outside help.

That is not my distribution. 1 Tank, 1 Healer, 2 Melee DPS, 2 Ranged DPS, 1 Support (Bard) and I am not sure where to put Summoner tbh.

maybe i can help out on that^^
we know of necromancer that he can summon zombies and spirits that can whisk around throwing about heals (i suspect some smaller heals tho), i believe steven said something like this in a prev q&a:3

Chezshire wrote: »

But by hybrids do you mean:
The Class, which is the combination of two Archetypes
OR
A class that fits two separate roles (DPS/TANK/HEALER)

In my case,talking about classes, the first and main character will be a Predator (Rogue/Ranger) which will obviously be a full DPS and I'm planning on specialize it in PVP, because I'm going to take the Bounty Hunter title (I really want to say profession but as the wiki says, its a title)

And talking about a hybrid of roles i wanna try any of the two combinations of Rogue/Cleric (Cultist/Shadow Disciple), seems like adding the rogue archetype is what it takes to be in the "dark path" when we talk about classes, i can picture any of this two classes being like the shadow priest in WoW focusing on self healing wile be able to heal others

PD: Now that i think of it, I have always wanted to be some kind of "Inquisitor" in a game, you know, this character who is a zealot of his fate but can take some unorthodox paths in order to accomplish his/her gods will, hope any of the clerics archetypes offers something like that

anything goes, hybrid playstyles and hybrid roles are both very interesting to me:3

dark pathing zealot sounds insanely cool:D
makes me think of witch hunters and flagellants of warhammer

skearnz

i wanted to make a sep comment for a my cleric/tank epiphany, lemme know if any1 has tried this idea in a diff game:3

so the idea is that i clad myself largely in plate and to some lesser part in cloth and using heal-over-time healing with 2-3 aoe healing spells (one with a heal-over-time effect ofc^^), and a hefty one just incase.

i hope in some way that there would be an augment to allow for more threat production allowing me to heal and pool mobs by just standing there and "looking pretty" xD

so what do you guys think of this?:D

edit: if this does work it could open up a spot for an extra dps/tank/healer since one would hopefully effectively fill 2 roles

easy

darkrunner

skearnz

easy wrote: »

darkrunner

artorias taught you well:3

Ferryman

@skearnz There has been discussions and predictions how the Summoner will be implemented. It can be a 'jack of all trades' like mentioned before or perhaps ranged damage dealer or support or some kind of hybrid of these two. I am not sure is there any exact answer at this moment so I guess we have to wait a little bit longer to get more information.

skearnz

ferryman wrote: »

@skearnz There has been discussions and predictions how the Summoner will be implemented. It can be a 'jack of all trades' like mentioned before or perhaps ranged damage dealer or support or some kind of hybrid of these two. I am not sure is there any exact answer at this moment so I guess we have to wait a little bit longer to get more information.

prtty much^^
i do wonder tho, they have eluded to some nifty utility abilities like mage hovering over a gap, rogues picklocking and tanks being to...perceive threats (iirc?) so that does bring to mind what the summoner's utility could be:3

but yea need to wait on that 1:D

Avernik

Anything involving Cleric, Bard, Mage or Summoner.

But we all have to start somewhere and my very first attempt at a "Hybrid" character would probably be primary Cleric augmented with Bard (Scryer)... or... primary Bard augmented with Cleric (Soul Weaver).

That said, I would probably first give Cleric/Cleric (High Priest) a shot before going straight into Hybrid.
I'm sure it will take a while for me to settle on what fits best for my playstyle.

Ventharien

Sarevok wrote: »

Like a Tank/Summoner running a potion launcher who summons mobs to soak up damage

From what we've been told only main class summoner will actually have summoned creatures. I'm betting a tank summoner would actually be an anti summoner, locking down summoned creatures.

Ventharien

skearnz wrote: »

i act had something ion mind about this! not fighter but rather cleric/tank
imagine being able to tank and hold aggro through healing spells xD

I don't think you'd be able to hold aggro in anything more than a temporary off tank role. Remember, main archtype is what you do, second one is how you do it. So maybe that would be how Tank/Cleric worked, but i think Cleric/Tank would just be a healer not afraid to get their hands dirty in the melee, maybe through shielding, or higher armor values.

Damokles

Ventharien wrote: »

Sarevok wrote: »

Like a Tank/Summoner running a potion launcher who summons mobs to soak up damage

From what we've been told only main class summoner will actually have summoned creatures. I'm betting a tank summoner would actually be an anti summoner, locking down summoned creatures.

A summoner doesnt always have to summon anmials. I could imagine a Tank/Summoner to summon walls and shields to soak aoe damage. ;D

Ventharien

@Damokles True, but our tank abilities as we have them now ( certainly changing) already include summoning a wall, i think adding summoner in would do something different. But by creature i meant any autonomous damage source. floating swords etc.

Nagash

Damokles wrote: »

Ventharien wrote: »

Sarevok wrote: »

Like a Tank/Summoner running a potion launcher who summons mobs to soak up damage

From what we've been told only main class summoner will actually have summoned creatures. I'm betting a tank summoner would actually be an anti summoner, locking down summoned creatures.

A summoner doesnt always have to summon anmials. I could imagine a Tank/Summoner to summon walls and shields to soak aoe damage. ;D

let lose the BONE WALL! latest?cb=20180511202410

insomnia

A possiblity? Isn't the game designed with this in mind. A base class and a secondary class later on

Ventharien

Nagash wrote: »

let lose the BONE WALL!

That's littering!

Nagash

Ventharien wrote: »

Nagash wrote: »

let lose the BONE WALL!

That's littering!

its recycling thank you very much

Child Item