Don't make the same mistake WoW did with its hybrid classes. Dont wait 3 years to learn this lesson.

Basically for the entire duration of vanilla wow, hybrid classes such as retribution paladin, feral druid, dps shaman, etc were at best memes but never actually functional, never actually viable for anything.

If someone wants to be a hybrid dps-healer you shouldn't give him half the damage a full dps does. Thats just bad design, nobody will want to play that.

What you should do (let's compare an assassin and a templar) is this:

Both should deal good damage. Sure give the full dps a slight edge.
The rest of the templar's performance should come from healing, buffs and resilience, which are his classe's theme.
The rest of the assassin's performance should come from his stealth, high mobility and crowd control, which are his classe's theme.

Don't make hybrid classes memes and jacks of all trade, in practice, they will end up being only disappointments.

Find more posts tagged with

Staff

Comments

Azherae

Ironhope wrote: »

Basically for the entire duration of vanilla wow, hybrid classes such as retribution paladin, feral druid, dps shaman, etc were at best memes but never actually functional, never actually viable for anything.

If someone wants to be a hybrid dps-healer you shouldn't give him half the damage a full dps does. Thats just bad design, nobody will want to play that.

What you should do (let's compare an assassin and a templar) is this:

Both should deal good damage. Sure give the full dps a slight edge.
The rest of the templar's performance should come from healing, buffs and resilience, which are his classe's theme.
The rest of the assassin's performance should come from his stealth, high mobility and crowd control, which are his classe's theme.

Don't make hybrid classes memes and jacks of all trade, in practice, they will end up being only disappointments.

I wasn't aware that Ashes was making any Hybrid Classes in the way you explained it. I haven't seen any indication that there's a lesson to learn about this.

All Classes have access to all the abilities of their primary Archetype, so as long as the Primary is fine, the Class is fine, within standard variance relative to an encounter.

Sathrago

Azherae wrote: »

Ironhope wrote: »

Basically for the entire duration of vanilla wow, hybrid classes such as retribution paladin, feral druid, dps shaman, etc were at best memes but never actually functional, never actually viable for anything.

If someone wants to be a hybrid dps-healer you shouldn't give him half the damage a full dps does. Thats just bad design, nobody will want to play that.

What you should do (let's compare an assassin and a templar) is this:

Both should deal good damage. Sure give the full dps a slight edge.
The rest of the templar's performance should come from healing, buffs and resilience, which are his classe's theme.
The rest of the assassin's performance should come from his stealth, high mobility and crowd control, which are his classe's theme.

Don't make hybrid classes memes and jacks of all trade, in practice, they will end up being only disappointments.

I wasn't aware that Ashes was making any Hybrid Classes in the way you explained it. I haven't seen any indication that there's a lesson to learn about this.

All Classes have access to all the abilities of their primary Archetype, so as long as the Primary is fine, the Class is fine, within standard variance relative to an encounter.

i think clerics, bards, and summoners will be the ones to watch out for. Clerics have quite a few hybrid-esque abilities that allow them to fight and heal at the same time. Which could get annoying to deal with. I am not too too worried though, I can wait until the game gets more fleshed out before I start arguing about balance changes.

Ironhope

Azherae wrote: »

Ironhope wrote: »

All Classes have access to all the abilities of their primary Archetype, so as long as the Primary is fine, the Class is fine, within standard variance relative to an encounter.

So if you combine a support class (lets say cleric) with a dps class (lets say fighter) won't you get a hybrid one (healer + damage)?

Azherae

Ironhope wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

Ironhope wrote: »

All Classes have access to all the abilities of their primary Archetype, so as long as the Primary is fine, the Class is fine, within standard variance relative to an encounter.

So if you combine a support class (lets say cleric) with a dps class (lets say fighter) won't you get a hybrid one (healer + damage)?

No, you will not.

You will get a Cleric that does Cleric skills, and has all the same capacities for Damage as a Cleric does, with some small variances, buffs, etc that you can choose to attach to that damage.

So if your Cleric has one Damage ability, and you choose the Secondary Archetype of Fighter, you can use that secondary Archetype to increase that Damage ability.

And when you use a Healing ability, with the secondary Archetype of Fighter, you can use that secondary Archetype to enhance that Healing ability (for example, raising the chance that it will crit, or causing it to buff the target of the healing somehow).

Ironhope

Azherae wrote: »

No, you will not.

You say this then you say

Azherae wrote: »

You will get a Cleric that does Cleric skills, and has all the same capacities for Damage as a Cleric does, with some small variances, buffs, etc that you can choose to attach to that damage.

So if your Cleric has one Damage ability, and you choose the Secondary Archetype of Fighter, you can use that secondary Archetype to increase that Damage ability..

Wait, doesnt' that mean you hybridized your support class taking a dps route?

Azherae

Ironhope wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

No, you will not.

You say this then you say

Azherae wrote: »

You will get a Cleric that does Cleric skills, and has all the same capacities for Damage as a Cleric does, with some small variances, buffs, etc that you can choose to attach to that damage.

So if your Cleric has one Damage ability, and you choose the Secondary Archetype of Fighter, you can use that secondary Archetype to increase that Damage ability..

Wait, doesnt' that mean you hybridized your support class taking a dps route?

That depends on you. I'll clarify.

Every Cleric has the option to take the Damage ability 'Judgement'. It is not required for any Cleric to take it.

That would mean, (if I understand your concern correctly) that all Healers are hybrids from the start?

If it does not mean that, do you mean that 'Healers shouldn't have the option to have a damage ability like Judgement, because no one should take that, they should focus on healing only'?

If you don't mean that then is your concern that 'taking a different secondary Archetype would be better for improving your healing than taking Fighter'?

In my example that isn't true.

You could 'Be a Templar', then 'Not unlock the Judgement skill and focus your points into Healing skills only', then 'Use your Augment from Fighter to improve your healing in a specific way'.

Dygz

Primary Archetype Cleric is already healer + fighter.

Khronus

I'm not a huge fan of their current direction with the class system but only time will tell. I feel like they have a huge opportunity to make this system extremely unique and give players the freedom to make their choice but ultimately balancing will be an issue the more options we have. Instead of a few meme specs, we very well could have 30 meme specs and everyone will simply fall into line with 1 (maybe 2) secondary options are best for that class.

My ideal class system for AoC would be something like the holy trinity but every class has the opportunity to fill other roles if needed or if they wish to. Tank would have 4 styles of tanking and 4 styles of off tanking while being heavier on the CC side or increased damage. Clerics will be primarily healing but they should also be able to spec into some CC heavier secondary choices or possibly more support. Still with healing abilities but curving their playstyle their way. Every class can easily fill a role so we don't have the typical system where tanks get to experience anything they want at all times of the day, healers get in quick and dps have to beg for spots in raids. I say this as a main tank.

As for the original post. I believe I remember seeing or hearing something about summoners being the hybrid. Able to support, dps, heal and off tank. If this is the case and this is the only class able to fill any role, even if a little, this is kind bullshit.

wherediditrun

Khronus wrote: »

My ideal class system for AoC would be something like the holy trinity but every class has the opportunity to fill other roles if needed or if they wish to.

Except that it's not holy trinity and holy duality with that weird cousin who has learning disorder to tag along.
Removing dps from the equation does not change the way fights are conducted. The design, set up stays stays about the same, some numbers get retuned. Hence enrage mechanics, marely more stats on the other side again, mechanics themselves don't change are required to justify DPS existing in the game. But that's an artificial solution to self authored design hole.

I would love to see damage to add meaningfully to game play in way that expands the design space. I have no clear answers to this one, but I don't know, burst windows which require set up by the party. Divers who need to get in get out with the help of the party. Something like that. And all of a sudden "hybrid" classes would have more room to breathe as the design space of encounters is meaningfully expanded.

But that's not what we get. And devs are not willing to risk it. Instead you get tank n spank with some gimmicks on positioning based on boss attacks and environmental hazzards. Leaving little room for actual spec / class mastery. And yes when they add classes which are just flavors of same done thing, due to narrow design space, you have issues and people complaining that some classes are just weaker than others as they compete at exactly same thing. When we add boring group wide passives to justify their existence ensuring that specs gets picked by groups and all that jazz.

Ironhope

Azherae wrote: »

That depends on you. I'll clarify.

Every Cleric has the option to take the Damage ability 'Judgement'. It is not required for any Cleric to take it.

That would mean, (if I understand your concern correctly) that all Healers are hybrids from the start?

I don't think there is one single mmo-rpg out there where a support role character has 0 damage abilities and 0 opprtunity to improve them. Thats not what makes a class hybrid.

Holy Priests in World of Warcraft Classic for example (probably the most iconic healers in all mmo-rpg history) have damage abilities and talents to improve them.

It doesn't mean Holy Priests in World of Warcraft Classic are hybrids.
Thats not what makes a hybrid.

What makes a hybrid is a base archetype which has as a core element of design the ability to fit at least 2/3 base roles (for example, damage and healing) or even 3/3 roles, and can specialize in maximizing its potential in any of these 3 roles while maintaining basic abilities stemming from all 3 roles.

An example of this would be World of Warcraft's druid, which can either be a tank (bear) a dps caster/melee (boomkin/kitty) or a healer (restoration) but no matter what he specializes in, no matter which path he maximizes performance in, he will still do a basic/somewhat decent job in the other 2 areas.

Azherae wrote: »

If it does not mean that, do you mean that 'Healers shouldn't have the option to have a damage ability like Judgement, because no one should take that, they should focus on healing only'?

No.
You misunderstood sir.

Let me explain what I said earlier.

Lets say you have a Weapon Master, a dedicated damager. He has 10/10 damage and 1/10 healing.
Lets say you have a High Priest, a dedicated healer. He has 1/10 damage and 10/10 healing.

Okay so thats the basic archetype aspect of any game. You got damagers, healers and tanks (won't add tanks in this example to keep it simple).

But what about hybrids?
What if you comebine a cleric with a fighter for the hybrid templar for example?

If the solution the devs give (as the classic wow devs did in 2004) is that the templar will have 5/5 damage and 5/5 healing, then that's a disastrous design because nobody will want to be in that situation.

The solution, as Blizzard found out in 3 years of mmo-rpg design experience, is to let the hybrid excel in his chosen path while the rest of its performance comes from his base hybrid nature.

So for example, let the cleric who wants to specialize into damage excel in that regard, while the rest of his performance comes from his support abilities.

Azherae wrote: »

If you don't mean that then is your concern that 'taking a different secondary Archetype would be better for improving your healing than taking Fighter'?

Sorry didn't get what you mean with this.

Dygz

So.... Summoner is the only Primary Archetype hybrid?
And all of the Secondary Archetypes are hybrids except for the double-downs?

Aerlana

also, you forgot a thing... hybrid on wow were not hybrid but support. but people wanted to be able to have a big damages to say "i am best lol" and then devs listened to them... and was a big mistake... in WOTLK began people complaining about class uniformisation, why ? because "balance" ...

Enhance shaman, elemental shaman, retribution paladin, or shadowpriest, they were not DPS, and were not meant to be damage dealer role. They were support, here to improve their party damage.
The problem were not they have low damages, but they didn't have gameplay about support (or just little)
And when you were mage/warlock, you loved having a boomkin or enhance shaman with you. in BC when you were healer, having a shadow priest in your team was godtier even if shadowpriest was the lowest DPS class (also shadowlock in the raid loved them too ^^') . And i am not sure rogue did spite on the windfury totem enhance sham gave them.

But people were to focus on themselves... don't care improving other DPS. and then come WOTLK/cata were all class were able to either support others and doing damages. And so, death of the support role, less and less class identity from this point. when we reached MOP, all class became nearly the same

Support disappeared from MMORPG genre (not totally, but mostly) because people want "to play what they like" AND "have big DPS" ... Stupidity.

I really hope the bard will be close to what it is in game like FFXI for example : bad DPS, bad heal (not even 5/10 on both. . . Bard were not meant to heal or DPS but just improve all other.) or like RDM, here to help healers, and mainly put lot of debuff on bosses.

I hope the devs understand mistake wow did with class design from WOTLK until today (and probably until the end).
Make support great again

Ironhope

Aerlana wrote: »

... and was a big mistake...

Having class-specs actually work and have people play them is not a big mistake.

Having dead class-specs because their philosophy goes against human nature and the nature of team strategy is.

Aerlana wrote: »

in WOTLK began people complaining about class uniformisation, why ? because "balance" ...

Which had nothing to do with making hybrids work.

Class uniformisation happened because they wanted to give everyone evrerything. To give everyone a sprit, a stun, a bubble, a heal, a fear, etc.

Making hybrids work just comes down to numbers.
Dont give them 5/5 numbers.

Making a class fun to play similarly doesn't have anything to do with it having all the tools in the game. Many classes were fun in Classic (rogues for example) without having all the tools in the game.

I agree crowd pleasing is a bad game design philosophy, I couldn't agree more.

But having bad design aspects and not correcting them because ''it would be crowd pleasing'' would just be unreasonable.

So yeah, I agree, don't give every class virtually every tool.

But don't have hybrids nobody will play because they just don't do anything in the field you already pointed out you want to be good at, as a player, either.

And... I mean, the solution to hybrids didn't come in Wotlk.
It (largely) came in TBC.

Aerlana wrote: »

They were support, here to improve their party damage.

There was nothing the hybrids would do that the healer versions of the class wouldn't.

Maybe Shadow Priest for buffing Warlock shadow damage, if you happened to have a few warlocks in your raid.

Aerlana wrote: »

The problem were not they have low damages, but they didn't have gameplay about support (or just little)
And when you were mage/warlock, you loved having a boomkin or enhance shaman with you.

Yeah but if you were a BG premade you didn't.
If you saw a hybrid you would /laugh when he asked if he could join.

Aerlana wrote: »

Support disappeared from MMORPG genre (not totally, but mostly) because people want "to play what they like" AND "have big DPS" ... Stupidity.

Aren't healers and tank support class (there to make dps classes do what they're supposed to do) and still a basic element of any mmo-rpg?

Either way I don't think its fair to call people stupid for not playing stuff they don't like.

If the designers didn't make buffers fun, thats their problem.

A buffer or hybrid buffer could absolutely be made fun with enough effor and imagination.

wherediditrun

Aerlana wrote: »

Make support great again

MMO's don't lend themselves to distinct support roles. Ultimately, player should be able to progress through huge chunk of in game content alone. Or with an imbalance party. This in turn requires damage in their kit. As you cannot support the mobs away.

You can comeback at me with argument from "MMO are social game", which sounds nice on paper but does not work out once logistics are considered. Rolling support would require socializing with fellow players before you're even in the game. And rolling support only after you got enough friends to play with and help you level. This also makes implementing content which would require support for damage or tank classes to progress through problematic as well, as there will be times, most of it, when there is no support to take advantage of. Hence the content has to be tuned for no support parties as well.. thus diminishing the need for support class in the first place to beat game content.

Aerlana wrote: »

Support disappeared from MMORPG genre (not totally, but mostly) because people want "to play what they like" AND "have big DPS" ... Stupidity.

Playing what one enjoys is not stupid. Is why you are playing the game in the first place. However, the dps meters are often flawed, as it's easy hard parameter to measure and soft parameters are difficult to figure out. And we can agree that it often does more harm than good.

JustVine

wherediditrun wrote: »

Khronus wrote: »

My ideal class system for AoC would be something like the holy trinity but every class has the opportunity to fill other roles if needed or if they wish to.

Except that it's not holy trinity and holy duality with that weird cousin who has learning disorder to tag along.
Removing dps from the equation does not change the way fights are conducted. The design, set up stays stays about the same, some numbers get retuned. Hence enrage mechanics, marely more stats on the other side again, mechanics themselves don't change are required to justify DPS existing in the game. But that's an artificial solution to self authored design hole.

I would love to see damage to add meaningfully to game play in way that expands the design space. I have no clear answers to this one, but I don't know, burst windows which require set up by the party. Divers who need to get in get out with the help of the party. Something like that. And all of a sudden "hybrid" classes would have more room to breathe as the design space of encounters is meaningfully expanded.

But that's not what we get. And devs are not willing to risk it. Instead you get tank n spank with some gimmicks on positioning based on boss attacks and environmental hazzards. Leaving little room for actual spec / class mastery. And yes when they add classes which are just flavors of same done thing, due to narrow design space, you have issues and people complaining that some classes are just weaker than others as they compete at exactly same thing. When we add boring group wide passives to justify their existence ensuring that specs gets picked by groups and all that jazz.

It's really weird for me to hear 'dps isn't a real contributor'. I am used to games shoving archtypes away from the other two towards dps.

Ashes picked the right classes to both have hybrid space and have meaningful distinctions between dps in group combat.

Fighter (DPS)- Is usually in charge of making sure the enemy doesn't gain too much advantage with its burst damage via cc interrupts, debuffs, and steady dps. In systems with meaningful weaponskills and a distinction between blunt pierce and cutting damage (not confirmed or denied in ashes) they are usually the dps most capable of exploiting enemy's mechanical weaknesses to physical damage. Traditionally can be the melee off tank, because they are the class that cares the least about their positioning compared to the other 7 archtypes. With a good augment system they are usually able to secondary tank not just off tank, get access to more debuff types, or take a more burst damage heavy approach.

Mage (DPS)- Minion/aggro control, burst damage. Mage are the most able to get into trouble with hate if built correctly and must be defensively minded in their positioning in a boss battle. They should have the highest dps /density/ even if not overall output. They are always in charge of exploiting an enemy's magical weakness. They require the team be ready to mitigate hate to output their burst damage. In a good combat design there is a way for mage to get even more damage with this burst set up if timed correctly ( ia either an ally's applied debuff or an enemy's built in weakness reveal mechanic.) Mage's tend to not really change their role much so much as either their way.of going about it or their capacity to not die. They usually spec well into changing the damage curb through debuff however. Most mages tend to be pretty content with not having as much flexibility as other classes.

Ranger (DPS)- Positional burst damage king. Melee burst damage. Unlike mage they tend to need offensive positioning. They tend to handle more soft cc than fighter and are automatically better suited at changing the damage curb as a result. They are less flexible than fighter in weaponskill choices due to what positions they gain the most damage from with their abilities and their need to not get hit as much. They take the most risk in their positioning. They are more likely to get overwhelmed by minions or aggro. They spec well into 'becoming more like fighter but with better soft cc' but also spec well into augmenting the parties overall strategies while still having high melee burst damage through either smn or brd.

Rogue (DPS)- Set up and damage over time positional king. High over all dps. This is the closest thing to the 'diver' I can think of. Their high evasion means they can be in dangerous positions like fighter, but unlike fighter they still need to pay attention to their positioning because their burst damage is reliant on it. Obviously they get the most benefit from flanking out of any class. They should have the tools to both distract the target if need be so the ranger gets a better shot or helps recover from a team members mistake/unlucky situation. They should probably be able to spec into main tank if evasion tanking is a thing. But also specs well into magic damage over time or damage curb mitigation. Or just 'even more damage.' They are pretty flexible in the triangle due to their almost support like role in achieving high dps as a group.

If thats not 'meaningful distinctions between damage classes.' I am not sure what you are looking for. No garuntees that is how Intrepid will build them but the /concepts/ are naturally there.

SirChancelot

Ironhope wrote: »

.

Aerlana wrote: »

The problem were not they have low damages, but they didn't have gameplay about support (or just little)
And when you were mage/warlock, you loved having a boomkin or enhance shaman with you.

Yeah but if you were a BG premade you didn't.
If you saw a hybrid you would /laugh when he asked if he could join.

Honestly, that sounds like the root problem... /Laughing at someone who wanted to join

Ironhope

SirChancelot11 wrote: »

Honestly, that sounds like the root problem... /Laughing at someone who wanted to join

I would agree with you if the prejudice was unfounded, but the prejudice was strongly founded on fact.

For the previously explained reason, hybrids just didn't work in Classic and it took Blizzard 3 years to let people excel in the direction they wanted, that they chose, while being hybrids and having the rest of their performance come from their hybrid nature.

The people in question were rude (I mean, sometimes they weren't, often they would politely explain they want to win and that their chances would go down with a jack of all trades player as opposed to a specialist) but they were right.

wherediditrun

JustVine wrote: »

It's really weird for me to hear 'dps isn't a real contributor'. I am used to games shoving archtypes away from the other two towards dps.

Ashes picked the right classes to both have hybrid space and have meaningful distinctions between dps in group combat.

<...>

What happens when your main tank dies? Oh, now that throws the thing a bit off. Either tankier dps need to rotate between tanks, perhaps to use a tank pet. Healer now needs to make sure due to lack of aggro control they can stay on point and keep the party alive probably burning some heavy cds.

If the healer themselves are a tanky with heavy cooldowns perhaps they can temporary tank with an aid of some hybrid class ensuring the rest of the party is topped off.

What happens when healer dies? Well hopefully there are some hybrid classes to cover for it. Or everyone just dies due to sustain being lost. Hopefully some hybrid class can help, if not when you're kind off f. Perhaps heavy cc can be used to win the small encounter until healer can be raised or something like that.

Loss of one of the role becomes an a chaotic event requiring swift adaptation to a situation or results in a wipe.

What happens when in a dungeon a dps character dies? Well, nothing really. You generally continue as you used to hoping your stats will be sufficient and it often is. That's to illustrate that nothing is changed about the scheme if supposed holy corner gets removed. Hence the role is insignificant. It's a question of tuning numbers, but not of actual gameplay. At some instances it our right comedic: some dps mismanages aggro, perhaps it's even of benefit to let them die because they risk the important role tank losing it's traction.

So it's very nice for you to write the supposed differences of those classes. Sad thing is, that generally they don't matter. I wish it did matter, but they end up as flavor or theme for a character rather than something game respects and actually uses in it's encounter design as one of core components.

JustVine

wherediditrun wrote: »

JustVine wrote: »

It's really weird for me to hear 'dps isn't a real contributor'. I am used to games shoving archtypes away from the other two towards dps.

Ashes picked the right classes to both have hybrid space and have meaningful distinctions between dps in group combat.

<...>

What happens when your main tank dies? Oh, now that throws the thing a bit off. Either tankier dps need to rotate between tanks, perhaps to use a tank pet. Healer now needs to make sure due to lack of aggro control they can stay on point and keep the party alive probably burning some heavy cds.

If the healer themselves are a tank with heavy cooldowns perhaps they can temporary tank with an aid of some hybrid class ensuring the rest of the party is topped off.

What happens when healer dies? Well hopefully there are some hybrid classes to cover for it. Or everyone just dies due to sustain being lost. Hopefully some hybrid class can help, if not when you're kind off f. Perhaps heavy cc can be used to win the small encounter until healer can be raised or something like that.

Loss of one of the role becomes an a chaotic event requiring swift adaptation to a situation or results in a wipe.

What happens when in a dungeon a dps character dies? Well, nothing really. You generally continue as you used to hoping your stats will be sufficient and it often is. If you play a healer or even a tank who due to some silly dps guy who doesn't manages their aggro properly you put them lowest on priority list in terms of who are you going to save first, or maybe even let the die cuz their mismanagement of aggro puts everyone in danger. That's to illustrate that nothing is changed about the scheme if supposed holy corner gets removed. Hence the role is insignificant. It's a question of tuning numbers, but not of actual gameplay.

So it's very nice for you to write the supposed differences of those classes. Sad thing is, that generally they don't matter. Or matter very insignificantly, being more about the 'flavor' or theme than contributing something to encounter design. I wish it did matter, but they end up as flavor or theme for a character rather than something game respects and actually uses in it's encounter design.

In good combat design DPS character dying simply means that the tank and cleric can't sustain the fight long enough to win. Good combat design means that DPS must have some level of skill required in order to complete the group encounter. Mana, health, and abilities are limited resources.

As listed in my explanations of each classes role, they all have some effect on either controlling the damage curb or abilities that significantly lower the time required to keep fighting (burst damage). They also have distinct roles to play in aggro control and positional defense. When one of these components fall, the incoming damage flow is no longer being curbed, meaning the tank and healer become more strained and it becomes amplified the longer the fight goes. Without the dps burst damage in a fight, the longer the fight goes, the more the resources are taxed. Every death or lack of skill is noticeable with the chosen archetypes for ashes and they are definitely not 'same role different flavor'.

I'm sorry you've played games with bad combat design but that's not how it has to be. Will AoC reach that level of design? We will see. But it's not 'impossible' and damage definitely plays an important role in a good combat designed game.

wherediditrun

I appended my previous response with an addition: I.e what's the point of burst damage, if we are fighting the boss. And game design does not offer some mechanics around the boss to provide burst windows? Not that as a concept it does not exist, but it's not something the team build their strategy around. Unless you can provide me with a few examples to prove that it isn't as exotic and rare case as I see it.

Imagine this, boss is invulenrable unless you work with your team via some environment mechanic to expose the boss to damage in short windows. All while adds are pouring in so the regular dps has something to do in trying to out kill rather than out tank. While be burst must work with who ever is working on exposure mechanic on the moment to sync their nukes? How many raids / dungeons you know of which uses it as a winning condition?

JustVine wrote: »

In good combat design DPS character dying simply means that the tank and cleric can't sustain the fight long enough to win.

Stat retuning. Yes. DPS makes sense, because the boss has bigger numbers. As I've mentioned, it's a solution to self authored design hole. And the problem with blunt number balancing is that it leaves very little room for change. Either is too hard (not difficult) or too easy is a common result.

JustVine wrote: »

Good combat design means that DPS must have some level of skill required in order to complete the group encounter. Mana, health, and abilities are limited resources.

In most scenarios that's being a bot pressing rotation occasionally avoid a mechanic. Or doing the raid gimmicks because the classes themselves are pretty boring and uninvolved.

JustVine wrote: »

As listed in my explanations of each classes role, they all have some effect on either controlling the damage curb or abilities that significantly lower the time required to keep fighting (burst damage). They also have distinct roles to play in aggro control and positional defense. When one of these components fall, the incoming damage flow is no longer being curbed, meaning the tank and healer become more strained and it becomes amplified the longer the fight goes. Without the dps burst damage in a fight, the longer the fight goes, the more the resources are taxed. Every death or lack of skill is noticeable with the chosen archetypes for ashes and they are definitely not 'same role different flavor'.

One one hand strain is put, and when it comes to blunt number balance by pushing the slider slightly. On the other hand entire thing devolves into chaos. That's exactly the same thing I was talking about. You're talked differences do not occupy same spot of importance like having a role of a healer or tank. My argument is that they SHOULD. Given that we have 8 folk parties.

Perhaps not in each and every dungeon and not all classes / specs need this at all times. But damn, I wish I see someone pushing that frontier a bit more.

Child Item