Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Class Naming Concerns -> Poll
Geronimo
Member, Alpha Two
I noticed quite a few threads and discussions about class naming concerns or piques that people had with various class naming choices (including my own). This seems to have gone on for awhile so I got curious about what the consensus was on this topic. As a prospective citizen of a scientific node, I thought it would be useful to have a poll on this for three reasons:
Personally, I think that most of the classes and archetypes seem well thought out, but here are a few bones of contention that I have seen around the forums:
Some people do not think there should be any changes, and others have expressed that even proposing this demonstrates the worst sort of insolence towards the hardworking devs. I disagree with that, as a developer myself I imagine they would be open to considering feedback from the future users.
Anyway, I would like to kick off a poll as follows:
THE POLL
- Without a structured democracy we will just engage in useless rants on the subject
- It is futile to criticize someone else's work without a better proposal
- I do not have alpha access and so have nothing better to do
N.B.: This may or may not sway the devs into altering their hard-wrought creation but hopefully it will give them other perspectives to consider.
Personally, I think that most of the classes and archetypes seem well thought out, but here are a few bones of contention that I have seen around the forums:
- The "tank" archetype is a trinity role while all the others are their own archetypes1,2,3
- Too much "Shadow" prefixes instead of alternatives like (Void, Night, Dark etc)1
- Underwhelming class names1
- Gender locked names (Warlock, Shadow Lord, Archwizard, Sorcerer)1
- Unknown words (Scion, Argent)1
Some people do not think there should be any changes, and others have expressed that even proposing this demonstrates the worst sort of insolence towards the hardworking devs. I disagree with that, as a developer myself I imagine they would be open to considering feedback from the future users.
Anyway, I would like to kick off a poll as follows:
THE POLL
- If you have an idea for class names include a list that shows the changes in a new comment.
- If you like the current class names, then vote for the "no changes" proposal below.
- Please do not comment on this thread to add additional complaints/rants. Instead, make a proposal.
- If you do not have a proposal, click the "like" button below the proposal(s) you think are best without further comment.
- Please add any reasoning for your changes.
- If I am able to keep this thread clean (only containing actual proposals - with moderator help of course) I plan on using this forum and likes as the platform for polling. If not, after 2 months I will move the top 10 proposals (with the most likes) into a proper surveymonkey poll and include a link here and other places that concerned AoC citizens may be lurking.
- Obvious joke proposals may be appreciated for humor (if they don't violate the CoC), but these will not be considered for the top 10 final survey submissions no matter how many likes they get.
0
Comments
Please LIKE this one if you do not want any changes or feel proposing changes is insolent.
As noted earlier these are annoying nitpicks, and overall I think the classes designed are awesome. But I am obviously over-hyped for AoC to even bother with this thread and wanted to put out some feedback for consideration.
I don't think i can take you too seriously when one of your concerns are that words are sexist.
But here's my input for the poll. No changes are needed.
I don't think its either of these things, but I still think no changes is my answer.
@Sathrago I am hoping the discussion is not taken too seriously, otherwise the thread will devolve into an argument or rant like some others, and no one will want to propose anything.
I was more of just trying to get a feel for the community consensus on class naming while at the same time not adding to a rant but offering something useful.
Also please note the points listed above are just examples seen on the forum and elsewhere, not all from me. I do not have a problem with Warlock, see my proposal. But you are right, I think I will rephrase that.
I edited that "no change" line to include just the normal "no change" vote.
I don't think so. It's just what I've observed from the last 4 or 5 discussions similar to this - which isn't a reflection of your suggestions - probably more a reflection that there are higher priority functions & features they are working on. Make sense?
"Tanky McTankface who Tanks as a Tank+Tank"
Love it!
1, Agree.
2, Shadow probably has significance in the games lore, and as such it is probably relavant to the classes that use it in their name.
3, The only class that fits in this for me is the tank class.
4, Each of these names is only gender specific if the lore of the IP considers them gender specific. If the lore in Ashes says that a Warlock and a Witch are the same thing, other than being make and female respectively, then I agree that the name needs to reflect this. If the lore says a Warlock can be a male or a female, then these names are fine.
5, I agree that these specific two names are odd, but I don't necessarily see a need to change them. Using a French word for a color to name your class is just odd - even if the word does have a long history of being used in heraldry (which I assume is why it is used here). Scion on the other hand - Ashes isn't the first game to call a class this - and since the word is basically a synonym for prodigy (but sounds better as a class name imo), I'm fine with it.
To me though, I am likely to refer to every class in the game as follows; primary/secondary.
This means that if you think you are a Knight, as far as I am concerned, you are a tank/fighter.
I am not passionate about this though, just a personal preference.
Or mage called RANGED DPS??
Change the damn name to Defender or Vanguard. Pls.
Considering that we don't know how you can augment abilites, i don't see a need for "Blade Caller", "Wildblade" "shadow Disciple" and "Shadow Caster" to be changed. Though i can see changing the name of 1 of the last 2, so they aren't that similar, might be an idea.
With the "Archwizard" to "archmage" seems logical as the base class is called mage
Defender seems like a good replacement for tank
no
Bard/Cleric = Lightbringer
A Bard strengthens, uplifts. A Cleric heals. Combining the two could certainly bring light to the darkest situation.
Cleric/Mage = White Mage
A Mage is filled with raw power. A Cleric is guided by spiritual sensibilities. Combined they are principled power.
I totally approve these two.
They sounds great
That was the thought process behind #3.
Combination ---> Old --> New
Archetype ---> Tank ---> Defender
Because i am in the team of "thats a trinity role"....sorry.
Archetype ---> Fighter ---> Warrior
Because all classes fight but Warrior is what i think of at this class.
Archetype ---> Ranger ---> Hunter
Because Ranger is for me a classcombo as you will see, but the archetype is a hunter for me.
Fighter/Fighter ---> Weapon Master ---> Champion
Its the best fighter under the fighters, so he is the champion for me.
Fighter/Tank ---> Dreadnought ---> Protector
With the second archetype as tank, the warrior protects the others.
Dreadnought sounds like a big spaceship for me, but maybe i played too many space-games.
Fighter/Ranger ---> Hunter ---> Knight
Because the knight is good in melee like a sword (fighter) and range like a crossbow (Ranger).
Fighter/Mage ---> Spellsword ---> Warmage (sounds in german better)
Spellsword sounds more like a mage who summons swords, so a mage/summoner for me.
Fighter/Cleric ---> Highsword ---> Crusader
Crusader is kind of the same as paladin but Paladin is for me the tank/cleric. Crusader is more the offensive one as i have history in mind.
Fighter/Bard ---> Bladedancer ---> Gladiator
Bladedancer is beatifull too, and it might sound strange why am i using gladiator here.
What i have in mind is that a gladiator is a warior in a arena, who is entertaining the crowd with his fighting skills, and entertaining is a bard while fighting is a fighter. That is my thinking behind this.
Tank/Fighter ---> Knight ---> Phalanx
Phalanx is as we know from history lessons the well shielded unit in the old roman empire, but they can fight well too like fighters. And it sounds nice.
Ranger(Hunter)/Fighter ---> Strider ---> Ranger
Thats what a ranger for me is, as i said at the Archetype at the top. A ranger for me is someone who can still fight well at range but has now gained the ability of beeing good in melee range like a fighter.
Ranger/Mage ---> Scion ---> Arcane Hunter
Still a hunter, but now with more magical / arcane ablities.
Ranger/Cleric ---> Soulbow ---> Inquisitor
I am not sure what to think about a soulbow. The inquisitor is someone who hunts down the nonbelievers for his god and/or religion. So it is still a hunter, but is now doing his holy job for his religion.
Mage/Tank ---> Spellstone ---> Spellbinder
Beacause...why stone?.... i mean yeah its sturdy, but.... a stone?
A spellbinder would negate the spells from enemy-casters, by binding it magicaly.
Mage/Ranger ---> Spellhunter ---> Druid
Because for me a druide is a nature-spellcaster. Ranger stands for the nature and mage for the casting.
A good reason not to use this would be if the Intrepid team wants to program a real druid archetype in some later expansion.
Mage/Mage ---> Archwizard ---> Archmage
Like someone else said, mage + mage = archmage.
Mage/Cleric ---> Acolyte ---> Psionic
A psionic for me is someone who uses spells that are more directed on the mind of someone. Cleric is the one for me who stands for wisdom and especialy for believing, both things that are one with the mind. Its kind of a mage who wants to convert you to his believings by using magic on your mind.
Summoner/Rouge ---> Shadowmancer ---> Illusionist
Rouge stands for stealth and distraction and a summoner can use his magical powers to cast/summon such distracting illusions. (And to reduce all the shadow....... names.)
Summoner/Mage ---> Spellmancer ---> Elementalist
Mage stands for casting the different elements. Summoner would summon the elements, so that would be a elementalist. (And the reduce all the spell....... names)
Cleric/Ranger ---> Protector ---> Exorcist
Because Ranger/Cleric is the hunter who hunts down the nonbelievers/possessed and the cleric/ranger is the cleric who makes the exorcism then. And it sounds nice. (Why protector? Why should cleric or ranger protect?)
Cleric/Cleric ---> High priest ---> Cardinal
Cardinal sounds as impressive as Archmage. And i think its more beautiful than just a high priest.
Bard/Fighter ---> Tellsword --> Bladedancer
Thats where i would use the name bladedancer and not at Fighter/bard, because for me the name bladedancer is somenone who dances with blades, and dancing sounds for me as the bard-archetype and not as the fighter-archetype.
Ok, these are many, but dont forget, these are only some ideas to think about. Its nothing that i want to enforce on you or someone else, so please stay calm. I am open for more ideas of other people and their reasonings, because even if nothing of that will be used in the game, its still a nice idea to think about.
I will also agree that there is an overuse of the word "shadow" when there are many other creative alternatives.
Sexist naming can be fixed with almost the stroke of a pen so that is also a non-issue but the thing I have the most problems with is "unknown words". For hell sakes, if you don't know the word, GOOGLE IT and expand your vocabulary a bit. If we only used common words it would be boring (kind of like the use of shadow
Also if you are going to have a problem with "Tank" then dreadnought needs to be addressed as well because it falls into the same category of modern terminology (dreadnought is a class of battleship and also used in space games quite often but this is not a space game)
I also wrote augment abilites. No where did i said got new abilites. We still don't know how the abilites can get augmentet. Maybe the fighter/summer can get blades to spin around him/her. And other abilites that creates a blade
I was basically going to say this exactly. Ditto.