gfjhs

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

You are wrong because your primary class is your classkit and your secondary class is lots of fluff.

E.g. from Steven:
For example; A fighter has a skill called “Rush”, that allows him to rush towards a target and upon reaching the target, deals x damage with a chance to knock the target down. If that fighter were to choose Mage as his secondary archetype (Spellsword), he would gain access to certain augments that he could apply to his primary skill tree. Let’s use his Rush skill as an example; As a Spellsword, he could choose to apply a teleportation augment to the Rush skill, which would allow the skill to now teleport you to the target, eliminating the charge time on the skill.

It's fluff and minor changes, not mind altering class swaps.

Edit: I would still be on the fence tho, there is alot there that can still fuck around with balance and interactions that might have unintended side effects. Their scope is huge and there are several red flags that just don't sit well with their overarching goal.

Balrog21

Rift suffered from this....they could have fixed it but decided to NOT listen to the player base, and on top of that they went and added more classes....ughh....
I do hope Intrepid takes the time during a and b to look at the numbers and balance it the best they can. Otherwise they are going to have a lot of classes that will never get played or only used as a mule.

unknownsystemerror

Here is some cuteness to help with your feelings.

WizardTim

No way to know until someone tries.

Ventharien

So long as most of the augments give a situational bonus, and not a statistical one, it will be much closer to balanced. For example, changing an abilities damage type, or changing some action of the ability. Like the commonly used charge example. Is teleporting to your target instead of charging there better? It's definately different, and could give you an edge against abilities similar to the tank wall we've seen, but it could also get you trapped behind enemy lines as it were, if you aren't careful.

George_Black

I share your concern.
However, I can make peace with maybe 8-15 classes being viable, as long as all weapons are viable for competitive PvP and PvE.

It would be terrible if you like spears or dual wield for example, and find out that only two handed and one hand/shield is viable.

If I play Dreadnaught or Weapons Master doesnt concern me as much as being able to use dual wield and fight like a warrior (as opposed to assassin).

I would like the option to choose from full fighter, tanky fighter, fighter that can use a but of magic, but if the options were more limited, realistically, it wouldn't be a deal breaker.

Forced into playing only two handed if I wanted to play as a warrior, would be a deal breaker.

Flashman

This will probably make you feel less optimistic, LOL, but Star Wars Galaxies original set-up was that you had a bunch of professions and could be, say, a rifleman who loved to dance or a bounty hunter who was also a politician, or a Bio-Engineer who was also a Teras Kasi Master, etc, etc. And the result was two things... 1) They had to dumb the game down to very specific, generic classes to regain control of it all but, 2) People - like myself - remember those early days SO WARMLY because the original system was absolutely amazing and fun.

My takeaway being, if Intrepid can go anywhere near balancing the class choices, and retain it as the system for the long term, people will look on Ashes with similar warmth and affection for doing something memorable.

Plateau

@grisu and @Ventharien re: the Teleport Rush that I have heard about too many times already.

I suppose that example helps a little, since it is relatively harmless and still pretty cool.

But it's only one example, and I'm not sure how well it holds up against Intrepid's direction for secondary classes. Supposedly they will let you shift your role/function a little bit (not entirely), and I'm not sure it's possible to do that with only "fluff" additions or utility tweaks. Rather you would need to make significant tradeoffs between damage/defense/mobility/sustain/etc on your abilities, so that you can perform a significantly different role.

For example, if I understand things correctly, when I take the Cleric secondary, it will let me add a small but significant amount of healing to my kit, so I can perform somewhat as an off-healer. It's not just going to add shiny lights and a small amount of Holy damage to my attacks.

And I still don't think they can come up with 4 unique ways to do that for every ability. Really how many different ways can you add shiny particle effects and healing/support/holy damage to a Fighter's weapon swings? Maybe I'm just not creative enough to imagine it.

Noaani

leonerdo wrote: »

I'm seriously starting to worry that the 64-class system and all the augment choices will be the downfall of this game.

Not going to lie, but I feel the same.

The only way I see it working with Intrepids stated goal in mind (or at least my take on their stated goal) is if they drop the notion of balancing each of the 27 augments for each ability. That is a foolish path to attempt balance - and would result in a bland class system that gets a LOT of criticism for claiming to have 64 classes but in truth only has 8.

Rather, they need look at the game as having 72 classes, and balance them all against each other (64 base classes, plus one more class for each primary class using social organisation augments, making 72 classes).

What they need to do is assign each class a score for each of; melee defense, magical defense, ranged attack, melee attack, offensive buffing, defensive buffing, offensive debuffing, defensive debuffing, healing and CC. The 8 classes using social organization augments would need to be somewhat middle of the road in all aspects - this keeps things somewhat balanced while allowing players to make minor tweaks to their over all ability in various areas.

Once you have assigned these roles to each class, you then need only balance three augments for each ability, the three from your subclass choice. What this means is that instead of having to balance 27 augments against each other for every ability, you would only need to balance 9 sets of 3 augments (same total number, less balancing). As long as the end result of each class is able to fulfill the role assigned to that class - and those roles should all be balanced against the other roles - then you have a system that is somewhat balanced.

I'm not saying this is an easy task at all - in fact I will say that even doing it this way it is a massive undertaking. What I am saying is that it really isn't that big of a deal if a Tank² charge is a really powerful ability but a tank/rangers charge is less powerful.

What matters is that the two classes are over all balanced with each other.

Caeryl

As long as there isn’t something that is the go-to in more than half the possible combat scenarios, then let it be balance via chaos. This beats that beat those beats them beats this. Cyclical balancing is generally the most “fun” kind

Wandering Mist

Caeryl wrote: »

As long as there isn’t something that is the go-to in more than half the possible combat scenarios, then let it be balance via chaos. This beats that beat those beats them beats this. Cyclical balancing is generally the most “fun” kind

Yes, cyclical balance is the idea situation, but even that can get out of control if you have too many variables in play (League of Legends and Pokemon are perfect examples of this). What makes this even more confusing is that Intrepid have gone on record multiple times saying that they will be balancing the game around group play, NOT individual classes:

"There will be match ups in 1v1s where one class will be superior to another; and that application should be a rock-paper-scissors dynamic. We want there to be counter-play between the different classes... Instead it's going to be a group focused balance, where as long as you have the diversity of classes present, that's going to be an equal level playing field. It's going to be very dependent on skill and strategy" - Steven Sherif

I think what Steven means here is that as long as you have all 8 primary classes present, there will be an even balance. The thing is, this will very rarely happen in the actual game, in either PvP or PvE. If they truly decide to stick with the "group balance" direction, then the majority of fights will naturally be unbalanced even if there are equal numbers of players on both sides.

grisu

The cleric itself is advertised as a class that heals your allies by damaging you enemies. Probably not all skills obviously but it literally showcases what it would do as an augment.
You hit with the sword and get healed for it. So yeah it literally will be just a shiny sword that gives you strike 10 hp back or something.

They said it times and times again your abilities come from your primary, your 2ndary is just customization to steer you class in a different direction by Enhancing your primary abilities.

If you want to make more of it than it is, that's on you then. A blink is not extra vfx it already exist as a mage blink. I'm sure they will be economical with those spell effects and reuse it where it fits. Proccing an interrupt on a 2ndary tank augment isn't crazy either. Doing a poison proc that hempers healing from a 2ndary rogue isn't crazy either.
It's a total of 64 classes but it's still 8 time a rogue to 4 physical classes and 4 magical ones. There will be lots of overlapping effects.

Caeryl

Wandering Mist wrote: »

Caeryl wrote: »

As long as there isn’t something that is the go-to in more than half the possible combat scenarios, then let it be balance via chaos. This beats that beat those beats them beats this. Cyclical balancing is generally the most “fun” kind

Yes, cyclical balance is the idea situation, but even that can get out of control if you have too many variables in play (League of Legends and Pokemon are perfect examples of this). What makes this even more confusing is that Intrepid have gone on record multiple times saying that they will be balancing the game around group play, NOT individual classes:

"There will be match ups in 1v1s where one class will be superior to another; and that application should be a rock-paper-scissors dynamic. We want there to be counter-play between the different classes... Instead it's going to be a group focused balance, where as long as you have the diversity of classes present, that's going to be an equal level playing field. It's going to be very dependent on skill and strategy" - Steven Sherif

I think what Steven means here is that as long as you have all 8 primary classes present, there will be an even balance. The thing is, this will very rarely happen in the actual game, in either PvP or PvE. If they truly decide to stick with the "group balance" direction, then the majority of fights will naturally be unbalanced even if there are equal numbers of players on both sides.

Not balancing for 1v1s means every class is able to be unique. Obviously if you run around as a healer and get attacked by a rogue or burst-mage, you probably lose because you kit isn’t geared to handle high-burst. On the other hand, if you get attacked by a fighter, you can likely out heal the more moderate sustained damage while laying on damage of your own. If you encounter a tank, you both mostly waste your time. If you encounter a sustain dps mage, you’d have a rough time, but probably winnable depending on player skill.

Balancing for groups means your tank is equipped to lock down the rogues and burst mages that might pop your healers or equally squishy dps. It means your ranged dps are equipped to pressure a backline healer to disrupt their ability to keep healing on the tank and their group. It means the sustained damage fighters are equipped to disrupt a tanks ability to lock down your squishies.

It also means they’ll have to look into the synergies and weakness a one-role group should have. Should all stacked heals grant 100% of their healing, 50%? Should you be able to stack HoTs from different augments of the same skill? Should buffs refresh the first, refresh the highest, should they stack from each source? How long should a group be able to cc lock a target? Should debuffs on a target stack, refresh?

These are going to be the biggest concerns when balancing. 1v1s will never be balanced unless there are no classes, no gear, no roles, etc.

WizardTim

leonerdo wrote: »

I'm seriously starting to worry that the 64-class system and all the augment choices will be the downfall of this game. (28 potential augments for every ability?) There's no way to balance all of those choices. It's gonna take a ton of work just to design all of the augments to be unique, and to make vfx for all of them. Plus, there won't be any concept of "class kits" with elegantly designed interactions, since every build is essentially made piece-meal out of independent abilities/augments. If they don't back down on those ambitious goals, then I fully expect 90% of the abilities, to be bland, imbalanced, or janky af. And we'll just end up with 20 meta builds anyways.

Am I wrong? Please tell me why I'm wrong.

I'm not really all that concerned myself.

Other games have explored abilities that change through player choices. ESO abilities can grow and advance to one of 2 options, for example. Augments seem to just be an extension to THAT style of character progression.

Rogue augments might increase critical damage for abilities, grant bonus damage for your position (backstab), bonus damage/effects when hitting a stunned or CC'ed target, or adding additional effects like bleed, debuffs, disruption, or stun.

Mage augments might add effects based on the element used, teleporting/daze/stamina drain for electrical abilities, DOT for fire, etc.

Basically, I suspect every ability is going to have a core purpose. Damage Opener, Damage Closer, CC, Buff, Debuff, Heal, etc. Augments will be geared towards the abilities in question from the class they come from. All aspects from your core class will likely be super... moderate, and very strictly follow class themes. So your primary class won't be at full efficacy by itself, you'll need the secondary (even if you just double up on your primary) in order to realize your full potential.

Damage Opener for a Rogue is typically a high burst positional or situational damage, like droping out of stealth with an assassination. Add that to a Fighter opener like Charge and you get a higher crit chance when charging an enemy.

Rogue utility will likely be centered around stealth aspects, breaking CC, disruption, etc. A Fighter might have a utility stance that, with a Rogue augment, gives him stealth when not moving or something, or allows him to drop hate against him (for a DPS focused fighter that doesn't want to pull from tank).

I suspect the augments are going to be fairly basic, and represent additions to a main class based on what kind of elements the secondary class uses.

Keep in mind, you get augments for religion, race, and social things as well. However, I suspect these augments will likely be blanket augments that just apply to your character and don't overtly affect each ability. Similar to the ability to train up your race and stuff in ESO.

Ventharien

Yeah ESO is probably not too bad a similar idea. Especially with the ability to change your secondary class giving it some flexibility.

Ravudha

leonerdo wrote: »

28 potential augments for every ability?

Where's the 28 figure coming from?

EDIT: nvm, 7 secondary classes x minimum 4 augments.

Caeryl

Ventharien wrote: »

Yeah ESO is probably not too bad a similar idea. Especially with the ability to change your secondary class giving it some flexibility.

ESO is a very bad game to pull any ideas of class balance from. Their classes are little more than recolors, with most ability choices being completely unrelated to class selection. (36 morphs from class vs 60 weapon skill line morphs and 46 guild skill line morphs)

The last thing I want is the spreadsheet style balancing that’s going on in ESO. Classes should feel unique and distinctly different from each other. If going from one class to another is only a matter of vfx and if I stand in melee or not, I don’t consider that a successful class-based game.

George_Black

Ventharien wrote: »

Yeah ESO is probably not too bad a similar idea. Especially with the ability to change your secondary class giving it some flexibility.

ESO is the example of a promise to have numerous unique builds, but in reality there is only one meta build per class.

Noaani

Yeah, ESO is a bad choice for a game to compy in terms of class design.

flameh0t

leonerdo wrote: »

I'm seriously starting to worry that the 64-class system and all the augment choices will be the downfall of this game. (28 potential augments for every ability?) There's no way to balance all of those choices. It's gonna take a ton of work just to design all of the augments to be unique, and to make vfx for all of them. Plus, there won't be any concept of "class kits" with elegantly designed interactions, since every build is essentially made piece-meal out of independent abilities/augments. If they don't back down on those ambitious goals, then I fully expect 90% of the abilities, to be bland, imbalanced, or janky af. And we'll just end up with 20 meta builds anyways.

Am I wrong? Please tell me why I'm wrong.

I think it will be okay. It just looks more complicated than it is. The way I perceive it, to keep it simple..

Example (totally made up, for understanding purposes)
Tank class
Skill, activate - Defend shield wall.
Base skill - Raises shield to block 50% incoming dmg.

Then depending on what your secondary arch type is, it may be augmented with fighter and becomes

Tank class
Skill, activate - Defend shield wall.
Base skill - Raises shield to block 50% incoming dmg. Aug, adds reflect 5% dmg to attacker

Or if you choose Tank/tank

Tank class
Skill, activate - Defend shield wall.
Base skill - Raises shield to block 50% incoming dmg. Aug, increases dmg blocked by 15%

So the way I read it is that it's just like a little tickle flavour.. Your pie will ways be a pie, you just have to pick the flavouring.. or your sandwich will always be a sandwich, you just pick the contents.. or your pizza will always be a pizza, you just have to pick the toppings.

But then again, I could be totally wrong.

Child Item