Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!

Possibility to change class system due to feedback

George_BlackGeorge_Black Member, Intrepid Pack
edited June 2020 in General Discussion
Is there a plan B if the system receives negative feedback once all classes and their combinations are accessible for testing AND have been tested thoroughly?

Obviously we wont know until we test all the class combinations and weapon playstyles, but we may find that it fails the developers and players expectations.

One idea might be to move away from class combinations and establish 15 or do stand-alone, defined classes, with unique theme*.

Another might be a more strict course with 20 classes, locked weapon selection and shared theme for a few of them.

I guess my main question is, if it doesnt work, is there time to develop a new class system?

*theme has nothing to do with function.
A holy knight is different than a dark knight, but both are tanks.

Comments

  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    I would hope they have a backup plan - not because I think they will have issues, but because backup plans are always a good idea.

    That said, I do think that if the playerbase are willing to accept a difference in theme (as per your definition) as being enough to distinguish two classes from each other, there really won't be much of an issue.

    If players expect 64 unique functional classes, we will have an issue - if we expect maybe 12 - 16 different functional classes with 4 - 6 themes of each, we'll be fine.
  • grisugrisu Member
    Or just iterate until it works?
    It's still just a bunch of classes with "a lot" more options. If the classes don't work and no one likes them, it's because the class is unappealing not because we have "a lot" of options to customize it.
    I can be a life fulfilling dream. - Zekece
    I can be a life devouring nightmare. - Grisu#1819
  • WongWong Member, Intrepid Pack
    edited June 2020
    It really depends on what exactly the feedback is.

    Right now, i don't see any problem with the system. You have a main class that supplies the main playstyle of your character (i.e. if you choose a mage main, you are going to have elemental spells like fireballs etc) and a secondary class that gives flavor to the main class - maybe a mage gets an augment that turns his fireball to a lightning ball, or fractures the fireball where 80% of the damage is dealt to the main target and the rest spills on the ground as a DoT AoE. A mage+rogue is still a mage. A Fighter-mage is still a fighter. You don't have 64 classes, you have 8 different flavors for each archetype - fighter, tank, mage etc.

    1. If there is feedback that 1,2,3 classes are not particularly good, they can revisit their class kits.
    2. If there is feedback that augments in some classes are not particularly good for one reason or another, they can revisit that as well.
    3. If there is feedback that everything is terrible in the class system then something went terribly wrong and there are a couple of ways to go about it, but the point where we get all classes is in Alpha2 which is supposed to last several months as well.

    At the end of the day, the reason we have tests is exactly that. Test things earlier in development and iterate on them until it works.

    That being said, i think people should tone down the theorycrafting and crazy imaginary things that classes might/will/should have. I think the designers have a solid vision on what they want each class to be. Not everything we want to be in will be in the game and there might be some things we don't like about some classes. That however doesn't mean that the whole class system needs to be redesigned.

    I haven't asked anyone about the A1 builds, but i am willing to bet money that each time they test the build is at least a little bit updated, hence a new iteration of the test environment.
  • George_BlackGeorge_Black Member, Intrepid Pack
    Mate this is the second time you reply without reading and you miss the point.

    Read again, dont skip. Then post.
  • JahlonJahlon Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha One
    So each class has 8 sub-classes since your main is fixed, but your secondary is changeable.

    I don't think they are going to just scrap the 8x8 system and come up with 15 classes.

    They've already removed 4 main archetypes years ago, so they have worked these numbers on paper for years.
    hpsmlCJ.jpg
    Make sure to check out Ashes 101
  • AtamaAtama Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    Ikcen wrote: »
    You will have 8 classes. Then the things will be object of long list of adjustments. The perfect class balance is literally impossible, due the fact the players are very different, so there always will be a room for fixes and updates. That is why your idea does not have benefits. 8 or 64 classes, there always will be a negative feedback and constant improvements.

    Also the development team should do something after the game is released.
    Pretty much this, yes. ^
     
    Hhak63P.png
  • NagashNagash Member, Leader of Men, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    change what you want just don't touch my necromancer
    nJ0vUSm.gif

    The dead do not squabble as this land’s rulers do. The dead have no desires, petty jealousies or ambitions. A world of the dead is a world at peace
  • WongWong Member, Intrepid Pack
    Mate this is the second time you reply without reading and you miss the point.

    Read again, dont skip. Then post.

    Who are you talking to and what exactly did he miss? I assume you're talking about me. Please explain what exactly i missed in the post.
  • George_BlackGeorge_Black Member, Intrepid Pack
    Jahlon wrote: »
    So each class has 8 sub-classes since your main is fixed, but your secondary is changeable.

    I don't think they are going to just scrap the 8x8 system and come up with 15 classes.

    They've already removed 4 main archetypes years ago, so they have worked these numbers on paper for years.

    There is a possibility that the 8x8, meaning the 8 classes with 8 augmentation sets might feel empty, with just a handful of them being viable and fun to play, while the rest combos dont perform as expected.

    I will take the (a)fighter and (b)rogue classes to make an example:
    (a)
    Weaponmaster
    Dreadnaught
    Shadowblade
    Hunter
    (b)
    Duelist
    Shadowguardian
    Assassin
    Predator

    Will all the above combos be solid. If not, and only half[4]of the above names are solid, why split strengths and features between 4 names, but instead take those strengths and features into 2 or 1 class to make 2 or 1 viable playstyle instead if 4 non viable.

    More Fighter classes
    Spellsword
    Bladecaller
    Highsword
    Bladedancer

    More Rogue classes
    Nightspell
    Shadowlord
    Cultist
    Charlatan

    @mrsynth as you see on the original post I didnt do any lazy theory crafting or claim to know what classes will be like, I just asked "if the system doesnt work, do we have time to address it". As for the other topic that you patronized and said "Steven has arleady addressed it, so chill", if the question was never asked it would have never been addressed. Check the date of tge topic, and then check the date of the Dev Update.

    Testing phases are for discussion.

    @Nagash Necromancer comes from summoner and cleric. Let's examine...

    Summoner based classes:
    WildBlade
    BroodWarden
    ShadowMancer
    BeastMaster
    Spellmancer
    Conjurer
    Necromancer
    Enchanter

    Cleric based classes:
    Templar
    Apostle
    ShadowDisciple
    Protector
    Oracle
    Shaman
    HighPriest
    Scryer

    Do you find that Necromancer and the remaining 15 classes above will be viable in combat?
    Would you like to see the Necromancers identity and strengths diluted between Shadowmancer, Conjurer, Shadow Disciple if indeed after testing not all combos seem viable?

    I will type this here again. Obviously we dont know anything until we test all classes. But once we do, if the system doesnt work, do we have enough time to rebuild it? If I dont ask whether there is a plan B now, when will I? At Beta2?

    If no questions are asked during a testing period before the game goes live, then what are we doing here?
  • George_BlackGeorge_Black Member, Intrepid Pack
    edited June 2020
    Ikcen wrote: »
    You will have 8 classes. Then the things will be object of long list of adjustments. The perfect class balance is literally impossible, due the fact the players are very different, so there always will be a room for fixes and updates. That is why your idea does not have benefits. 8 or 64 classes, there always will be a negative feedback and constant improvements.

    Also the development team should do something after the game is released.

    I guess swearing does get you banned hey?
    Where in this topic did you get the impression that I was seeking the perfect class balance between 64 classes?
    I asked whether we have time AFTER TESTING to change the system. Your posts have no benefits, even after 6-7 pages of quote wars.

    Obviously you seem ok with 64 classes before testing and you dont put your mind to looking into possible problems, like class flavour or class viability.

    Here is a logical answer to the OP: Yes, after you test all the classes, we have time to make changes.
    Here is the answer you gave my PK fearing killer: balance is impossible (you dont say) your question has no merit, players have different ability level, constant improvements.
    Is that what you think as a good idea? Not asking questions but instead do constant improvements when it goes live? Look what happenned to ESO code with their constant improvements on stuff that should never clear beta.


    I am not even arguing the perfect class balance between 64 classes, before testing. I am asking if there is a plan B and if we have enough time for changes.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    I've been thinking about this, and I think they already have a backup plan in mind.

    If I were in Steven's position and I saw that I couldn't manage 64 unique classes, all I would do is emphasize the 8 classes and that the 64 are sub classes, rather than classes.

    I would talk more about whether a player was a Cleric rather than a Necromancer,, purely to get the playerbase used to the notion that they are indeed a Cleric, and can change to any flavor of Cleric.

    I'd make a point of joining class balance threads to weigh in to this effect as well.

    About the only actual in game change I would make - assuming I were in Steven's position and we couldn't manage 64 unique classes - is to make it slightly easier to change sub classes. Not easy to the point where you can do it at will, but to the point where you don't always need to go to a town, and where players may be able to change classes two or three times a night if the situation dictates.
  • Alpha SoulAlpha Soul Member, Phoenix Initiative, Avatar of the Phoenix, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    I don't get the impression that they will scrap the class system (although they certainly can) Having 8 classes that can be augmented seems to be the current direction and a good deal of thought has gone into it.

    It would really depend I guess on just how exactly "it isn't working" that gets pinpointed on the class system rather than something else.
  • NagashNagash Member, Leader of Men, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    Jahlon wrote: »
    So each class has 8 sub-classes since your main is fixed, but your secondary is changeable.

    I don't think they are going to just scrap the 8x8 system and come up with 15 classes.

    They've already removed 4 main archetypes years ago, so they have worked these numbers on paper for years.

    There is a possibility that the 8x8, meaning the 8 classes with 8 augmentation sets might feel empty, with just a handful of them being viable and fun to play, while the rest combos dont perform as expected.

    I will take the (a)fighter and (b)rogue classes to make an example:
    (a)
    Weaponmaster
    Dreadnaught
    Shadowblade
    Hunter
    (b)
    Duelist
    Shadowguardian
    Assassin
    Predator

    Will all the above combos be solid. If not, and only half[4]of the above names are solid, why split strengths and features between 4 names, but instead take those strengths and features into 2 or 1 class to make 2 or 1 viable playstyle instead if 4 non viable.

    More Fighter classes
    Spellsword
    Bladecaller
    Highsword
    Bladedancer

    More Rogue classes
    Nightspell
    Shadowlord
    Cultist
    Charlatan

    @mrsynth as you see on the original post I didnt do any lazy theory crafting or claim to know what classes will be like, I just asked "if the system doesnt work, do we have time to address it". As for the other topic that you patronized and said "Steven has arleady addressed it, so chill", if the question was never asked it would have never been addressed. Check the date of tge topic, and then check the date of the Dev Update.

    Testing phases are for discussion.

    @Nagash Necromancer comes from summoner and cleric. Let's examine...

    Summoner based classes:
    WildBlade
    BroodWarden
    ShadowMancer
    BeastMaster
    Spellmancer
    Conjurer
    Necromancer
    Enchanter

    Cleric based classes:
    Templar
    Apostle
    ShadowDisciple
    Protector
    Oracle
    Shaman
    HighPriest
    Scryer

    Do you find that Necromancer and the remaining 15 classes above will be viable in combat?
    Would you like to see the Necromancers identity and strengths diluted between Shadowmancer, Conjurer, Shadow Disciple if indeed after testing not all combos seem viable?

    I will type this here again. Obviously we dont know anything until we test all classes. But once we do, if the system doesnt work, do we have enough time to rebuild it? If I dont ask whether there is a plan B now, when will I? At Beta2?

    If no questions are asked during a testing period before the game goes live, then what are we doing here?

    I don't really care if its viable I just want to play as a necromancer people should know that about me
    nJ0vUSm.gif

    The dead do not squabble as this land’s rulers do. The dead have no desires, petty jealousies or ambitions. A world of the dead is a world at peace
  • Undead CanuckUndead Canuck Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    Are you sure? I was dead certain you would want to be a bard...
  • MeowsedMeowsed Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    edited April 2023
    .
    Mega troll frmr1cq9w89im2.jpg
  • WongWong Member, Intrepid Pack
    leonerdo wrote: »
    Is there a plan B if the system receives negative feedback once all classes and their combinations are accessible for testing AND have been tested thoroughly?

    Obviously we wont know until we test all the class combinations and weapon playstyles, but we may find that it fails the developers and players expectations.

    One idea might be to move away from class combinations and establish 15 or do stand-alone, defined classes, with unique theme*.

    Another might be a more strict course with 20 classes, locked weapon selection and shared theme for a few of them.

    I guess my main question is, if it doesnt work, is there time to develop a new class system?

    *theme has nothing to do with function.
    A holy knight is different than a dark knight, but both are tanks.
    Warning: The following is entirely speculation!

    My assumption is that if Intrepid runs into problems making 64 archetype combinations, they'll just stop making them, and rearrange their designs between the remaining 4-7 sub-classes per archetype. It's not much of a plan B or new system, per se, more like they just stop short on Plan A and focus on fewer classes. The original 64-class diagram would remain in-tact, just with some holes in it now.

    For instance, take the Mage class. They can probably make a unique and valuable version of it for Spellstone, Shadow Caster, and Acolyte, since those are fairly different concepts. But what about Arch Wizard, Sorcerer, and Warlock? Can you even tell what secondary archetype those come from? To me it just sounds like 3 different versions of magicky-mage.

    So they could reach a point where they run out of unique ideas for all those magicky-augments, and those 3 classes could start overlapping a ton. (They also have to avoid making Mage/Summoner too similar to Summoner/Mage.) Instead of pushing forward and splitting ideas (and balance efforts) between 3 classes, they might decide to scrap Mage+Summoner entirely, and save those ideas for Mage+Mage and Mage+Bard. And maybe some of the summoning-oriented augments can be saved for the Spellmancer (Summoner/Mage) class.

    More likely, they just make the subclasses one-at-a-time, and make as many as they can for each beta/release. And they'll fill in the holes when they can. Potentially some of those holes get filled after release. Maybe a few never get filled at all, if the 64-class system doesn't work out like you suggest.

    Personally, I suspect that will work out better in the long-run anyways. If they make only ~48 class combinations, we still get plenty of options, and they can avoid most of the egregious overlapping and ensure that each subclass has a unique theme and strengths.

    Classes are not supposed to be completely unique iterations of the archetypes though...
    A mage + something is still a mage, but with some flavor augments from the 'something'. All classes with a main archetype Mage are mages.

    Even if the augments for each secondary archetype are the same for all main archetypes you still have 8 skill kits and not 64.

    I know you are just speculating, but i don't really see such a major restructuring of the class system. Not unless something goes terribly wrong with ALL classes.
  • DamoklesDamokles Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Are you sure? I was dead certain you would want to be a bard...
    giphy.gif

    You called for me?
    roaaztC.gif
  • NagashNagash Member, Leader of Men, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    Are you sure? I was dead certain you would want to be a bard...

    cFADrne.jpg
    nJ0vUSm.gif

    The dead do not squabble as this land’s rulers do. The dead have no desires, petty jealousies or ambitions. A world of the dead is a world at peace
  • Undead CanuckUndead Canuck Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    I could never sass you, your undying everpowerful Nagashness.

    Just imagine though, doing one of the expansive unholy summoning rituals in an operatic voice! You would probably double the summoning power with the acoustics!
  • For me there are 8 classes, but when you mix Cleric with something else and call it a different thing, people will think it's another class.
    It should always be Cleric + something else, not Necromancer.
  • MeowsedMeowsed Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    edited April 2023
    .
    Mega troll frmr1cq9w89im2.jpg
  • AtamaAtama Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    leonerdo wrote: »
    BlackBrony wrote: »
    For me there are 8 classes, but when you mix Cleric with something else and call it a different thing, people will think it's another class.
    It should always be Cleric + something else, not Necromancer.
    Yeah I kinda agree with that. But Intrepid has already chosen to give each sub-class a unique name. And also they call them "Classes", while the base 8 classes are called "Archetypes". None of the nomenclature is good, in my opinion. I wish they would change it, but it's not that important.

    If they DO want to change it though, now would be the best time to do so, before people get used to it.
    I don’t like the nomenclature either.

    The way I look at it, what IS calls an “archetype” is a class. What they call a “class” is a specialization.

    There’s still plenty of variety and customization options, which is great, but it’s not as insane as having 64 actual “classes”. They have a very reasonable 8 classes.
     
    Hhak63P.png
  • It's 8 classes. The secondary class augments your abilites. Adding some "flavor" to the class. I think the 64 names is just so you have a better idea of what you are, instead of x/y. Or to make it sound cooler
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    insomnia wrote: »
    It's 8 classes. The secondary class augments your abilites. Adding some "flavor" to the class. I think the 64 names is just so you have a better idea of what you are, instead of x/y. Or to make it sound cooler

    I agree.

    To me, the 64 named classes are there to tell you the theme of the class, but your class X/Y will tell players exactly what to expect you to be able to do.

    If I were a summoner/cleric, it is fairly obvious that I summon stuff, and that stuff is to do with life and death. The fact that this makes me a necromancer is kind of a given - you could make a very easy inference as to what a summon/cleric would be like in terms of flavor without needing to know it was a necromancer

    However, if we look at a tank/fighter, other than knowing this is someone that can take a beating and can dish one out as well, we have no specific flavor that this class would need to take. As soon as we label that class as a Knight though, we all kind of get the same image as to the theme of the class, rather than just the function.
  • George_BlackGeorge_Black Member, Intrepid Pack
    This is my only concern regarding AoC.
    Due to many new people I want to necro this thread.
    Obviously we haven't seen the AoC class system yet, but when it comes to "play as you want" models the meta becomes very narrow and very few options being viable.

    So yeah, I hope people can read about my concern, see if they can relate and discuss.
Sign In or Register to comment.