Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Alpha Two Realms are now unlocked for Phase II testing!
For our initial launch, testing will begin on Friday, December 20, 2024, at 10 AM Pacific and continue uninterrupted until Monday, January 6, 2025, at 10 AM Pacific. After January 6th, we’ll transition to a schedule of five-day-per-week access for the remainder of Phase II.
You can download the game launcher here and we encourage you to join us on our for the most up to date testing news.
Alpha Two Realms are now unlocked for Phase II testing!
For our initial launch, testing will begin on Friday, December 20, 2024, at 10 AM Pacific and continue uninterrupted until Monday, January 6, 2025, at 10 AM Pacific. After January 6th, we’ll transition to a schedule of five-day-per-week access for the remainder of Phase II.
You can download the game launcher here and we encourage you to join us on our for the most up to date testing news.
Archetype & class question
Galux
Member
How's the Archetype / Class system going to work? Will you be able to master it all if you wanted on one character and swap between them similar to ffxiv or will the game be alt heavy?
0
Comments
Is that final?
For more information see this link
https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Classes#Changing.2Fswitching
Ashes is a roleplaying game - which means we get to play different characters... who have different roles than our main(s).
So what we know now, the plan at least. is that you pick one primary archetype for a character at the start and that is permanent. No changing it. (Archetype in this game is the equivalent of a class in just about every other MMORPG, they just rebranded it.)
On the other hand, your class is more like a specialization in other games. It's a significant choice but not a permanent one. You won't be able to swap them around casually, but you aren't locked into one forever. I don't think they've revealed what will be required (spending in-game currency, taking on XP debt, waiting for a cooldown, completing a quest, who knows) but something will be involved that makes it a big deal to change. But you can change.
So basically if you start out as a Bard, you're never going to be able to change that. At level 25, you can take on Fighter as a secondary archetype and become a Tellsword. If you decide later that you are too squishy and want to raise your defenses, you can swap over to Tank as a secondary archetype and become a Siren. But you'll never become a full-blown Tank as a main archetype unless you roll up an alt.
I'm rolling a tank, healer, and ranged dps. I won't settle on which augment until I try each that enhances my playstyle. For example, I'm hoping a Paladin makes a good off-tank that fits my playstyle. I'm not the main tank in big raids, but useful. On the other hand, I can be a main tank in smaller group content.
As said, class (or second archetype) is more a "specialisation" than a real class. Because it "only" gives augments, while main stats and skills comes from first archetype.
and because for the "big" content, the tank will be "main tank" i think all 8 spec can do this.
What will be able to maybe off-tank in those big content would be the 7 spec with tank as second archetype
Even more, "it has to be this way" A raid can reach 40 people for 64 "classes". If only a part of the 8 class tank can "main tank" it will be hard to get some.
Where can I read more about the Tank line from the Devs?
I never heard a non-Tank class with a tank augment could off-tank big content. I thought those were just "beefy" versions of said non-Tank class.
All of this is going to be interesting to see has time goes by. Isn't it exciting?
nothing being clearly said. but with 2 thing different we can think and hope that the 7 classes with second archetype tank (or part of them maybe) could be decent tank for "low" content (like some dungeons) or maybe even off tank.
tank will be clearly better, but getting more choice for smaller content is better. you will prefer take a "big" tank for anything but if your tank friend is not logged in, would be good to be able to have your broodwarden doing the job.
https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Tank
"more or less depending on what's happening"
For me it sounds on "always better choice, but sometimes, if you don't have one avaible, it is not mandatory"
https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Roles
Here for me, it clearly says that, while you wont be as good as character which primary archetype fit perfectly the role, you can do a similar work, on not hardest content.
tanking is "aggro" + "mitigation"
the second is also stuff dependant, (plate)
If one augment help for aggro, and another for mitigation. it could do the work (AGAIN not for the big contents, or no more than offtank on them)
The time we don't know anything about tank augments, it is pure speculation / hope
Frankly we just don't know. We do know that augments will change the behavior of skills, but they won't give you new skills.
So it is possible that, say, your Spellstone (Mage with Tank secondary) doesn't get the taunting and defensive skills of a Tank. But maybe your Fireball taunts enemies, and your Drain Essence heals you enough to keep you from dying, and in that sense you can off-tank. Or maybe it just gives you enough defensive abilities to stay alive a little longer when soloing, but doesn't grant that much true utility to a group so that you can do more than be less of a burden to a healer. We just don't know yet. And it's possible that Intrepid hasn't even gotten that far on their own internal testing to decide if that's where they want to go.
It's also possible that they'll decide one way, and after testing and feedback in alpha/beta, they change things before release.
Just as we can expect Clerics to have a School for Death that deals damage and a School for Life that provides heals.
But, we still have to see a list of Schools, a list of augments, and augment descriptions... and have them implemented and tested to truly know.
bard is support probably "buff/debuff" kind, so i don't think he will have taunt. maybe he will have a "redirect hate" thing like we can see on some games. (mainly i think of hunter on wow but not the only one)
augments from tank archetype will only "modify" skills to adapt a little what the class can do. So probably there won't be "taunt" but maybe hate bonus.
Again, we don't know anything from tank augments, and bard skills so... all said here can in the end be totally false ^^'
There isn't much information available, but based on what we do know, number crunching is possible. If you know all the Tank abilities, see below. If you don't, check the wiki for classes.
1. Ultimate Defense, which will, on average, be 40% damage reduction in a serious fight while it is up, if the player is decent.
2. Javelin, which will most likely turn the enemy toward you even if they choose to make monsters so big that they can't be actually pulled.
3. Bulwark, which is only advantage if a shield is equipped, but still a strong option.
Even if the two classes wear identical armor and weapons, we know that the base stats of the Bard will have less Constitution, which may lead to less damage mitigation. We can't be sure that they will have advantage in Power, but it's likely.
So even if the Siren (Bard/Tank) uses a buff with Damage mitigation Augment, it's really hard to be better than Ultimate Defense. Even if they put Threat Generation on one of their Debuffs, and it's powerful enough to match the 'additional threat' of Javelin, Javelin does some damage and pulls attention.
Even if they both equip a shield, the Argent (Tank/Bard) makes better use of this shield. Damage mitigation obviously favors the Argent.
But numerically, if the enemy does conal damage, the Siren is the most likely to have hate after the Argent eventually loses it. If single target damage, it might be harder because the Argent will also quickly lose hate if hit too hard and the target will start to bounce around. If they were tanking alone, or only with another /Tank, this could get rough. In this case the Argent will probably take it back, and a Tank main can almost always take it back safely as soon as Ultimate Defense is back up, as long as they are within the range of the upper hate line.
We can assume that Tank Threat Generation Augments will generate values of additional threat of at least 70% of the 'additional threat' assigned to the current Tank abilities, or a threat multiplier on your ability, because otherwise those augments are useless (since /Tank doesn't affect what gear you can wear nor offer any abilities).
Threat Multipliers are more likely since it scales better and balances things more. That's another essayworth though.
A Bard/Tank needs more support to get closer to a MainTank performance, but an OffTank's main source of damage mitigation is... the main Tank. So they only need to worry about 'generating threat' and 'not dying before the main tank can get Ultimate Defense back up'.
Again, where are you getting this info, or are you making it up? Because it looks like you're making it up.
Which part? You quoted something where I said there isn't much, then mention number crunching which can be done off Tank data in game and design based on the skills.
If your complaint is that we don't know 'if Tank will have Threat Generation and/or Damage Mitigation augments', then yes, I'm 'making it up'.
If it's about anything else, you'll have to clarify.
If you're questioning the math because I didn't include a bunch of equations that are almost required for MMO classes to even work, I can start giving the equations along with the inferences.
Basically what's in the spoiler, which has a lot of definitive statements that I suspect are complete speculation disguised as fact. Particularly since we have absolutely no numbers for Bards, know very little about what they will do, and also have no idea how augments and secondary archetypes will work outside of the most abstract concepts.
But so that I don't waste your time or mine, I have a question.
Is it fair for me to assume that Intrepid won't design a system that has obvious flaws or has failed before often enough for people in the industry to have experience with it?
If not, then no amount of math or logic will be acceptable.
An example.
"If Threat Generation abilities are a static value per ability and not a multiplier, then a Tank will need to depend more on Damage to tank at higher levels, making Fighters a strongly preferred tanking option due to their ability to put out more damage. Alternately, if Tanks have considerable damage to make up for this, most 'big boss' endgame content will have minimal need for Fighters."
If this fits your definition of 'speculation disguised as fact', I won't waste your time.
Obviously it does if you are the source of the section in quotes.
Hey, speculation is cool. It's what we've been doing for years on the various versions of the forums. But be careful about making definitive statements, they are extremely misleading.
Remember this thread is someone asking how things are going to work. If you answer the question with something you've come up with, but you don't make that clear, you're giving a dishonest answer.
"In general, it's best to make statements as positive and definitive as possible. Study the facts and then trust yourself to declare your opinion in clear and definitive terms."
If you have any disagreements with the definitive statements, also use definitive statements to share your perspective.
That is English 101. Everyone is expected to understand that it's all opinion and, here, mostly speculation.
If you want sources so you can draw your own conclusions straight from the sources, sure, ask for the sources.
Well, #1, if someone is asking for an answer and people answer that we don't know, then someone gives a definitive answer, it's implying that they do know. Which is dishonest.
And #2, I specifically asked for sources.
Finally, #3, no that is not true that "it's all opinion". We do have solid answers. We have lots of quotes from the developers. We have a lot of solid info in the Wiki and on Ashes 101, with citations. It's not all speculation. So if you are giving definitive answers to things as if you have solid information, and you don't, that's an issue. That's how you start rumors and spread misinformation.
All it takes is to simply state "I think that" or "based on my own numbers", or something along those lines.
And to be clear. We are not writing academic papers. This is an online forum. Quoting a writing guide is very, very badly misplaced. Put that nonsense away.
When writing, it's best to make definitive statements - instead of constantly saying, "I think, it's just my opinion", etc.
That's not just for academic papers. It's basic writing.
That's fair, and I won't bother giving the numbers, other than this, which I pulled from a thread that I am sure nearly no one wants necro'd so I won't link to it. I understand that all of these numbers are speculation and therefore useless, but anything else would be too.
Please continue to call it out whenever I have not used my language correctly enough to fit whatever your standard is for forum discourse. I mean this. I am still trying to improve at it.
Your humility is refreshing, and I honestly wasn't trying to denigrate you at all, I was just trying to avoid a misunderstanding.
Oh, please don't view it as humility. I don't want anyone to get any incorrect impressions of me. I'm toxic and I just want to 'win' most conversations, I just don't view shouting down others as 'winning'. So it's all just figuring out what other people's 'rules' are so that I can either disengage or 'figure out how to win given rules they will accept'.
Assume it's backhanded arrogance, and never think of me as an actually humble or even nice person. What I am is 'civil', at least I try to be, and I continue to hope that this is enough for all other parties involved in discourse with me to walk away from it feeling like it was productive, at least.