I think given some of the discussion here bares a point, in a 8 person party the option to spread tasks across multiple players in some combination may be desirable.
Let's take PvP for an example, if you're party is attacked by a party with one Cleric and little else in the way of healing but your parties healing is spread out amongst 3 party members in a x/cleric set up with 1 tank and 3 dps. You are likely in a better overall position assuming your x/clerics can overall heal similarly.
If the first parties cleric goes down, that's it, no more heals for that party. Whereas if the second party loses an x/cleric, they can still retain some healing and gain some damage or tanking from their primary archetype, thus keeping them more relevant.
Really I'm just excited for the next couple months and hopeful we start seeing classes be introduced monthly in twos and threes. Though I'm not holding my breath it would be fun to follow up the Character Creator with overviews of the classes and their archetypes.
I'm keeping my expectations pretty low on distinctiveness across secondaries. The descriptions I've read and extreme disappointment I've received from other games gives me the feeling the choice will be like your classes 'flavour' and not really a second class. Like a fighter being a cleric as secondary isn't going to have some kind of healing role in any regard; his moves might look 'holy' or have an option to self/proximity heal with a certain attack. Where as that same attack might add a little fire bust aoe if he goes mage, or summons a little swarm of bugs that debuff the target if he goes summoner. Not massive changes to the move, but little things in what they do. I'm almost expecting more aesthetic changes than huge game impacts...
I'm not bothered by the idea but I can see a situation like WoW where generally people crap on non-optimal secondary choices. And could really see some community let down - to say there are 64 (!!!) classes is wild and I just don't see it playing out like that. I'm expecting 8 with some twists for you personal preference in style.
I'm more worried about the 1 tank 1 healer 6 dps class distro. Ideally I'd love to see the trinity go away but that's whole different ball game.
You are correct, there won't be 64 classes. At least not as we know classes from other games, instead there will be 8 classes with 64 different variations.
I'm keeping my expectations pretty low on distinctiveness across secondaries. The descriptions I've read and extreme disappointment I've received from other games gives me the feeling the choice will be like your classes 'flavour' and not really a second class. Like a fighter being a cleric as secondary isn't going to have some kind of healing role in any regard; his moves might look 'holy' or have an option to self/proximity heal with a certain attack. Where as that same attack might add a little fire bust aoe if he goes mage, or summons a little swarm of bugs that debuff the target if he goes summoner. Not massive changes to the move, but little things in what they do. I'm almost expecting more aesthetic changes than huge game impacts...
I'm not bothered by the idea but I can see a situation like WoW where generally people crap on non-optimal secondary choices. And could really see some community let down - to say there are 64 (!!!) classes is wild and I just don't see it playing out like that. I'm expecting 8 with some twists for you personal preference in style.
I'm more worried about the 1 tank 1 healer 6 dps class distro. Ideally I'd love to see the trinity go away but that's whole different ball game.
You are correct, there won't be 64 classes. At least not as we know classes from other games, instead there will be 8 classes with 64 different variations.
Yes
But the debate is how far those 8 variations will actually vary from each other.
Will those 8 tanks play the same with minor flavor changes. Or will some of them have whole different play style changes due to shifted mechanics?
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
They won't play exactly the same and augments do not merely provide minor flavor.
No class will have a whole different playstyle because we still will be using the Active Skills of the Primary Archetype.
That still leaves plenty of room to play significantly differently.
8 different ice cream flavors, with 1 of 8 different toppings. There’s some debate as to whether we need a sample spoon. Choose wisely.
Okay but how much variance are those toppings going to provide?
Vanilla ice cream with chocolate chips, chocolate syrup, chocolate chunks, or m&m's on top are technically different... But they're all still just vanilla ice cream with chocolate on it.
I definitely want a sample spoon to try out stuff.
Okay but how much variance are those toppings going to provide?
Vanilla ice cream with chocolate chips, chocolate syrup, chocolate chunks, or m&m's on top are technically different... But they're all still just vanilla ice cream with chocolate on it.
I definitely want a sample spoon to try out stuff.
But the debate is how far those 8 variations will actually vary from each other.
As has been said in the past by myself and others, the system allows for a massive amount of variation between different classes using the same primary.
Take WoW as an example here. The game has (iirc) 6 actual tank classes/builds - protection warriors and paladins, and I believe druids, monks, death knights and demon hunters all have a valid main tank spec.
Each of these plays drastically different.
In Ashes, a protection warrior is a tank/tank. A protection paladin is a tank/cleric, a brewmaster monk is a tank/rogue - and so on.
So, the scope for variation between different classes of the same primary is absolutely there, without a doubt. Intrepid have also stated that they want variety between the different classes of the same primary.
So, we know that the variety of playstyles exist, we know Intrepid want that variety and we know the system allows for that variety.
But the debate is how far those 8 variations will actually vary from each other.
As has been said in the past by myself and others, the system allows for a massive amount of variation between different classes using the same primary.
Take WoW as an example here. The game has (iirc) 6 actual tank classes/builds - protection warriors and paladins, and I believe druids, monks, death knights and demon hunters all have a valid main tank spec.
Each of these plays drastically different.
In Ashes, a protection warrior is a tank/tank. A protection paladin is a tank/cleric, a brewmaster monk is a tank/rogue - and so on.
So, the scope for variation between different classes of the same primary is absolutely there, without a doubt. Intrepid have also stated that they want variety between the different classes of the same primary.
So, we know that the variety of playstyles exist, we know Intrepid want that variety and we know the system allows for that variety.
What more is there to discuss at this point?
I'm basing this comment off of the understanding that you disagree with my opinion where I support secondary archetypes being able to shift roles...
I hope that there would be that much variation in the different classes under a single primary archetype, but some of those specs in wow play very different from each other including all having their own resource bars specific to their class that drive they're playstyle. (The DK having runes and runic power for a builder spender, and a blood shield you need to manage for example is very different from a warriors shield block' reduces damage)
I hope that degree of variance is possible, but we haven't seen any examples with augments to show that level of change to an ability yet, which is why I am skeptical of that range in an archetypes variation from one secondary to the next.
But if there is that much variation between the different secondary archetypes under a primary that's great. And I'll also use that to beat the drum again and say that with that degree of change from augmentation, you should totally be able to use secondary archetype augments to shift the primary archetypes role to something else...
but some of those specs in wow play very different from each other including all having their own resource bars specific to their class that drive they're playstyle. (The DK having runes and runic power for a builder spender, and a blood shield you need to manage for example is very different from a warriors shield block' reduces damage)
Different combat resources like this is not the only (nor the best) way to differentiate classes. If anything, since they are virtually always a builder/spender paradigm, they tend to make classes play more similarly than they would without these resources.
My honest hope is that Ashes has no build/spender mechanics at all like this in any class, as they are both pathetic and lame in relation to what MMO combat can be. They are the literal source of the long running joke that the best WoW DPS achieves their top tier status by pressing 1, 1, 1, 2, where all others are pressing 1, 1, 1, 1, 2. While such jokes are not 100% accurate, they were probably 90% accurate, due to builder/spender mechanics.
But if there is that much variation between the different secondary archetypes under a primary that's great. And I'll also use that to beat the drum again and say that with that degree of change from augmentation, you should totally be able to use secondary archetype augments to shift the primary archetypes role to something else...
So, back in 2018, someone said they would like to see something that was not in Stevens general plan for Ashes. I can't remember what it was they wanted, and I don't much care. What I remember is the reply.
That reply was basically - I am making the game I want, and if there is something about it you don't like, feel free to get together a hundred and fifty million dollars and make your own MMO.
Steven wants primary class choice to define your role. That is a core aspect of this game to him.
You aren't going to change that. If you do not like that, see the above.
0
Options
HumblePuffinMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
if there is that much variation between the different secondary archetypes under a primary that's great. And I'll also use that to beat the drum again and say that with that degree of change from augmentation, you should totally be able to use secondary archetype augments to shift the primary archetypes role to something else...
I disagree too. Your primary archetype should be your primary archetype, and that is definitely the way intrepid is gonna go with it.
I think instead of beating that same drum you should consider the ways that augmenting that primary archetype might go. Its harder to do without knowing more class/abilities specifics but I can’t definitely think of quite a few ways augments can entirely change the feel of a class.
It’s also something I’m sure tons and tons of feedback will be provided on this through testing, which will hopefully make sure every choice actually feels meaningful. I can’t wait to get more class info to start speculating.
but some of those specs in wow play very different from each other including all having their own resource bars specific to their class that drive they're playstyle. (The DK having runes and runic power for a builder spender, and a blood shield you need to manage for example is very different from a warriors shield block' reduces damage)
Different combat resources like this is not the only (nor the best) way to differentiate classes. If anything, since they are virtually always a builder/spender paradigm, they tend to make classes play more similarly than they would without these resources.
My honest hope is that Ashes has no build/spender mechanics at all like this in any class, as they are both pathetic and lame in relation to what MMO combat can be. They are the literal source of the long running joke that the best WoW DPS achieves their top tier status by pressing 1, 1, 1, 2, where all others are pressing 1, 1, 1, 1, 2. While such jokes are not 100% accurate, they were probably 90% accurate, due to builder/spender mechanics.
But if there is that much variation between the different secondary archetypes under a primary that's great. And I'll also use that to beat the drum again and say that with that degree of change from augmentation, you should totally be able to use secondary archetype augments to shift the primary archetypes role to something else...
So, back in 2018, someone said they would like to see something that was not in Stevens general plan for Ashes. I can't remember what it was they wanted, and I don't much care. What I remember is the reply.
That reply was basically - I am making the game I want, and if there is something about it you don't like, feel free to get together a hundred and fifty million dollars and make your own MMO.
Steven wants primary class choice to define your role. That is a core aspect of this game to him.
You aren't going to change that. If you do not like that, see the above.
You misunderstand my point there. I was just giving one example, ashes already only plans to have mana, so it will not have any variation there... I get that.
Those just fed into the different mechanics used by different specs of tanks. Mitigation, self-heal, damage stagger, etc...
I hope all those different styles exist as options, but we haven't seen anything to show how yet... We are all just assuming augments of some kind.
Hey man, I'm not trying to say what the game is or isn't doing. They ask for player feedback, I'm giving an opinion. The post is about class expectations, and I just said I'm keeping mine low until we see more information. I hope there is that much variation between the eight secondaries for a primary archetype. But we haven't seen anything yet so we don't know for sure... I can also separately hope that this class design system allows for players to create the more creative builds that are out side your box... Just like you can do in pathfinder...
I think instead of beating that same drum you should consider the ways that augmenting that primary archetype might go. Its harder to do without knowing more class/abilities specifics but I can’t definitely think of quite a few ways augments can entirely change the feel of a class.
It’s also something I’m sure tons and tons of feedback will be provided on this through testing, which will hopefully make sure every choice actually feels meaningful. I can’t wait to get more class info to start speculating.
Im going to guess that "can't" was supposed to be a "can"?
I can think of tons of ways that augments could be used to change the feel, playstyle, and role of primary archetypes... But we don't know the full range of effects yet. I've mentioned several possible outlier builds with examples of augment effects over the last two years as random examples in threads. Some people don't like my creativity... Lol
But yes I'm super excited to get more information and start theory crafting weird stuff
I hope all those different styles exist as options, but we haven't seen anything to show how yet... We are all just assuming augments of some kind.
We don't need to know how.
All we need is to understand that the variety of playstyles exist, that Intrepid want that variety and that the system allows for that variety. From there, we leave it up to Intrepid to develop it. We don't need to know (and won't know) the details until Intrepid are ready to showcase entire primary archetypes.
No one has said you can't hope for what ever you want. What we have said is that when you say "I hope this thing happens", many of us will follow that up by pointing out what Intrepid have said in relation to the matter - so you know what to expect (as opposed to what to hope), but more importantly so that others reading it know what to expect.
I'm more worried about the 1 tank 1 healer 6 dps class distro. Ideally I'd love to see the trinity go away but that's whole different ball game.
I really hope they won't design dungeons and group content around 1,1,6. Instead I hope they will go with, 1 Main tank, 1 Off-tank, 1 healer, 1 support and 4 DPS.
I'm more worried about the 1 tank 1 healer 6 dps class distro. Ideally I'd love to see the trinity go away but that's whole different ball game.
I really hope they won't design dungeons and group content around 1,1,6. Instead I hope they will go with, 1 Main tank, 1 Off-tank, 1 healer, 1 support and 4 DPS.
Off tanks are a waste of space.
The game will be based around the assumption that groups will attempt to being along one player of each primary archetype.
I'm more worried about the 1 tank 1 healer 6 dps class distro. Ideally I'd love to see the trinity go away but that's whole different ball game.
I really hope they won't design dungeons and group content around 1,1,6. Instead I hope they will go with, 1 Main tank, 1 Off-tank, 1 healer, 1 support and 4 DPS.
Off tanks are a waste of space.
The game will be based around the assumption that groups will attempt to being along one player of each primary archetype.
I don't think off tanks are a waste of space, it's a DPS that yes probably does less DPS than a pure DPS, but can also help tank a extra mob or two. With this in mind the developers can make a wide variety of mechanics that wouldn't be possible with just one tank.
And Off tanks can be any of the primary archetype with Tank as secondary archetype, since Tank will most likely give some defensive arguments.
Maybe i have to much high hopes for the dungeons since I think of them more like 10 man content in WoW rather than 5 man content.
With this in mind the developers can make a wide variety of mechanics that wouldn't be possible with just one tank.
If the developers make content that requires two tanks, you tank two tanks - not one and a half tanks. An off-tank is a half tank, and as such has no actual place as far as I am concerned (I have had this view for longer than the term off-tank has existed - and judging by your forum name, longer than you have been alive. You will not change my mind here).
Assuming your DPS have the discipline needed, a tank should be able to tank as many mobs as their healer can heal them through. As such, splitting the healing up just makes things harder.
The thing with 10 player content in WoW is that it was designed for two groups. Two tanks, two healers, 6 DPS. In Ashes, that would be 16 person content (if the game has it), not 8 person content. The 8 person content in Ashes will be designed around one group consisting of one of each of the primary archetypes.
With this in mind the developers can make a wide variety of mechanics that wouldn't be possible with just one tank.
If the developers make content that requires two tanks, you tank two tanks - not one and a half tanks. An off-tank is a half tank, and as such has no actual place as far as I am concerned (I have had this view for longer than the term off-tank has existed - and judging by your forum name, longer than you have been alive. You will not change my mind here).
Assuming your DPS have the discipline needed, a tank should be able to tank as many mobs as their healer can heal them through. As such, splitting the healing up just makes things harder.
The thing with 10 player content in WoW is that it was designed for two groups. Two tanks, two healers, 6 DPS. In Ashes, that would be 16 person content (if the game has it), not 8 person content. The 8 person content in Ashes will be designed around one group consisting of one of each of the primary archetypes.
Off tank is not a bad thing, they can do quite good DPS and help Tank mobs if needed. Mechanics like second threat getting hit, threat drop mechanics on the main tank, debuffs that stack, shared cleave, are all simple mechanics where having an off tank is a good thing.
Maybe off tanks and extra support is silly to have in a "standard" group for dungeons, but I just feel like 8 man standard groups will be quite DPS heavy and nuke tactics will be a standard thing.
I'm mostly interested about how this will be balanced in pvp, specifically the arena system. Will support classes or tanks be able to compete in 1v1? Or will all mayors of military nodes simply be a meta DPS class.
I know there's speculation about a 'champion' system, but as far as I can tell that was mentioned 2 years ago and hasn't been covered since then.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
If it won't be balanced around 1v1 arenas, then imo 1v1 arenas shouldn't be in the game. Or at least, they shouldn't be parts of the game where people can earn rewards (loots, titles, etc).
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Well, we will have to test before we can meaningfully weigh in on what shouldn't be.
I think the testing has been done by other MMOs. Coming from WoW, for example, the culture that developed there based around pvp and arenas was toxic by most standards.
I'm imagining a future with military nodes all ruled by mages and rogues named "buttfart" and "smellypoo"
I'm keeping my expectations pretty low on distinctiveness across secondaries. The descriptions I've read and extreme disappointment I've received from other games gives me the feeling the choice will be like your classes 'flavour' and not really a second class. Like a fighter being a cleric as secondary isn't going to have some kind of healing role in any regard; his moves might look 'holy' or have an option to self/proximity heal with a certain attack. Where as that same attack might add a little fire bust aoe if he goes mage, or summons a little swarm of bugs that debuff the target if he goes summoner. Not massive changes to the move, but little things in what they do. I'm almost expecting more aesthetic changes than huge game impacts...
I'm not bothered by the idea but I can see a situation like WoW where generally people crap on non-optimal secondary choices. And could really see some community let down - to say there are 64 (!!!) classes is wild and I just don't see it playing out like that. I'm expecting 8 with some twists for you personal preference in style.
While I don't expect each augment to completely change an ability, I would be disappointed if there were purely aesthetic augments. That is to say, If all augments increase an ability's DPS by the same amount and you just choose between "fire damage DOT" or "bug swarm poison DOT", I'd be disappointed.
For a basic 'empowered strike' ability on a fighter, I would expect some elemental options for the mage secondary, some defensive/threat building options for the tank secondary, some party/individual stat buffs for the bard. For secondaries like Fighter/Rogue/Ranger/Summoner I expect an augment to change the way the attack itself works. That could be "charge up for .5 seconds and deal 1.5x the damage", "smaller range but significantly more backstab damage", "smaller damage but double the range", or "summon a floating weapon that does 2x the damage over 5 seconds".
These are all things that don't drastically change the ability, but if similar augments are given to each of the fighter's abilities each class could end up actually unique.
I'm more worried about the 1 tank 1 healer 6 dps class distro. Ideally I'd love to see the trinity go away but that's whole different ball game.
I'm not really worried about this considering that 1) parties will be balanced around 1 of each archetype and 2) augments are intended to 'blur the lines' between roles, so every 1/1/6 party won't function the same.
The one-of-each group is just wishful thinking. At the moment I expect Tank/Cleric/Bard/ranged-dps to be the preferred group composition because such a group works best for both PvE and PvP.
In PvP you would need to have a way to prevent the melee carpet from forming otherwise ranged classes are going to be preferred. In theory you use your Tank class with AoE directional blocks but I have yet to see this actually work and be a thing in any game.
According to ashesofcreation.wiki, it certainly sounds like your A2 choice by itself will not necessarily allow you to fill that role. Cleric as A2, for example:
What I'm wondering about, a bit off topic, is whether Cleric as a primary archetype will be able to specialize in damage enough to fill a DPS role? Thinking about Shadow Disciple, but I don't want to fill a healer role.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited April 2022
You could try to have your Shadow Disciple focus on damage.
Most likely you would still be doing some healing. And you would probably want to be grouping with a bunch of x/Clerics.
Don't expect to be able to out DPS the Rogue/x in an 8-person group.
If it won't be balanced around 1v1 arenas, then imo 1v1 arenas shouldn't be in the game. Or at least, they shouldn't be parts of the game where people can earn rewards (loots, titles, etc).
Arenas in general are not somewhere where you can earn loot.
Maybe off tanks and extra support is silly to have in a "standard" group for dungeons
Off tanks in any situation are silly.
If a raid has a need for a second tank (aggro play from mobs in any form, bosses that need to be kept apart, adds that require a tank etc), then you take a second tank - not an off tank. I have never once seen a situation in which a half tank is needed. If the mobs are so weak that you don't need a full tank, then you also don't need a half tank.
As to your last statement
[quote[but I just feel like 8 man standard groups will be quite DPS heavy and nuke tactics will be a standard thing.[/quote}I am unsure why this what you mean. Groups will be DPS heavy in comparison to a game like WoW (a WoW group has 3 DPS, an Ashes group has 6 DPS/support). However, obviously, the mobs in the game will be tuned to groups of 6 DPS/support, not to groups of 3 DPS.
Comments
Let's take PvP for an example, if you're party is attacked by a party with one Cleric and little else in the way of healing but your parties healing is spread out amongst 3 party members in a x/cleric set up with 1 tank and 3 dps. You are likely in a better overall position assuming your x/clerics can overall heal similarly.
If the first parties cleric goes down, that's it, no more heals for that party. Whereas if the second party loses an x/cleric, they can still retain some healing and gain some damage or tanking from their primary archetype, thus keeping them more relevant.
Really I'm just excited for the next couple months and hopeful we start seeing classes be introduced monthly in twos and threes. Though I'm not holding my breath it would be fun to follow up the Character Creator with overviews of the classes and their archetypes.
You are correct, there won't be 64 classes. At least not as we know classes from other games, instead there will be 8 classes with 64 different variations.
Yes
But the debate is how far those 8 variations will actually vary from each other.
Will those 8 tanks play the same with minor flavor changes. Or will some of them have whole different play style changes due to shifted mechanics?
No class will have a whole different playstyle because we still will be using the Active Skills of the Primary Archetype.
That still leaves plenty of room to play significantly differently.
Okay but how much variance are those toppings going to provide?
Vanilla ice cream with chocolate chips, chocolate syrup, chocolate chunks, or m&m's on top are technically different... But they're all still just vanilla ice cream with chocolate on it.
I definitely want a sample spoon to try out stuff.
That’s the big question. I agree about the spoon.
As has been said in the past by myself and others, the system allows for a massive amount of variation between different classes using the same primary.
Take WoW as an example here. The game has (iirc) 6 actual tank classes/builds - protection warriors and paladins, and I believe druids, monks, death knights and demon hunters all have a valid main tank spec.
Each of these plays drastically different.
In Ashes, a protection warrior is a tank/tank. A protection paladin is a tank/cleric, a brewmaster monk is a tank/rogue - and so on.
So, the scope for variation between different classes of the same primary is absolutely there, without a doubt. Intrepid have also stated that they want variety between the different classes of the same primary.
So, we know that the variety of playstyles exist, we know Intrepid want that variety and we know the system allows for that variety.
What more is there to discuss at this point?
I'm basing this comment off of the understanding that you disagree with my opinion where I support secondary archetypes being able to shift roles...
I hope that there would be that much variation in the different classes under a single primary archetype, but some of those specs in wow play very different from each other including all having their own resource bars specific to their class that drive they're playstyle. (The DK having runes and runic power for a builder spender, and a blood shield you need to manage for example is very different from a warriors shield block' reduces damage)
I hope that degree of variance is possible, but we haven't seen any examples with augments to show that level of change to an ability yet, which is why I am skeptical of that range in an archetypes variation from one secondary to the next.
But if there is that much variation between the different secondary archetypes under a primary that's great. And I'll also use that to beat the drum again and say that with that degree of change from augmentation, you should totally be able to use secondary archetype augments to shift the primary archetypes role to something else...
My honest hope is that Ashes has no build/spender mechanics at all like this in any class, as they are both pathetic and lame in relation to what MMO combat can be. They are the literal source of the long running joke that the best WoW DPS achieves their top tier status by pressing 1, 1, 1, 2, where all others are pressing 1, 1, 1, 1, 2. While such jokes are not 100% accurate, they were probably 90% accurate, due to builder/spender mechanics.
So, back in 2018, someone said they would like to see something that was not in Stevens general plan for Ashes. I can't remember what it was they wanted, and I don't much care. What I remember is the reply.
That reply was basically - I am making the game I want, and if there is something about it you don't like, feel free to get together a hundred and fifty million dollars and make your own MMO.
Steven wants primary class choice to define your role. That is a core aspect of this game to him.
You aren't going to change that. If you do not like that, see the above.
I disagree too. Your primary archetype should be your primary archetype, and that is definitely the way intrepid is gonna go with it.
I think instead of beating that same drum you should consider the ways that augmenting that primary archetype might go. Its harder to do without knowing more class/abilities specifics but I can’t definitely think of quite a few ways augments can entirely change the feel of a class.
It’s also something I’m sure tons and tons of feedback will be provided on this through testing, which will hopefully make sure every choice actually feels meaningful. I can’t wait to get more class info to start speculating.
You misunderstand my point there. I was just giving one example, ashes already only plans to have mana, so it will not have any variation there... I get that.
Those just fed into the different mechanics used by different specs of tanks. Mitigation, self-heal, damage stagger, etc...
I hope all those different styles exist as options, but we haven't seen anything to show how yet... We are all just assuming augments of some kind.
Hey man, I'm not trying to say what the game is or isn't doing. They ask for player feedback, I'm giving an opinion. The post is about class expectations, and I just said I'm keeping mine low until we see more information. I hope there is that much variation between the eight secondaries for a primary archetype. But we haven't seen anything yet so we don't know for sure... I can also separately hope that this class design system allows for players to create the more creative builds that are out side your box... Just like you can do in pathfinder...
Im going to guess that "can't" was supposed to be a "can"?
I can think of tons of ways that augments could be used to change the feel, playstyle, and role of primary archetypes... But we don't know the full range of effects yet. I've mentioned several possible outlier builds with examples of augment effects over the last two years as random examples in threads. Some people don't like my creativity... Lol
But yes I'm super excited to get more information and start theory crafting weird stuff
We don't need to know how.
All we need is to understand that the variety of playstyles exist, that Intrepid want that variety and that the system allows for that variety. From there, we leave it up to Intrepid to develop it. We don't need to know (and won't know) the details until Intrepid are ready to showcase entire primary archetypes.
No one has said you can't hope for what ever you want. What we have said is that when you say "I hope this thing happens", many of us will follow that up by pointing out what Intrepid have said in relation to the matter - so you know what to expect (as opposed to what to hope), but more importantly so that others reading it know what to expect.
I really hope they won't design dungeons and group content around 1,1,6. Instead I hope they will go with, 1 Main tank, 1 Off-tank, 1 healer, 1 support and 4 DPS.
The game will be based around the assumption that groups will attempt to being along one player of each primary archetype.
I don't think off tanks are a waste of space, it's a DPS that yes probably does less DPS than a pure DPS, but can also help tank a extra mob or two. With this in mind the developers can make a wide variety of mechanics that wouldn't be possible with just one tank.
And Off tanks can be any of the primary archetype with Tank as secondary archetype, since Tank will most likely give some defensive arguments.
Maybe i have to much high hopes for the dungeons since I think of them more like 10 man content in WoW rather than 5 man content.
Assuming your DPS have the discipline needed, a tank should be able to tank as many mobs as their healer can heal them through. As such, splitting the healing up just makes things harder.
The thing with 10 player content in WoW is that it was designed for two groups. Two tanks, two healers, 6 DPS. In Ashes, that would be 16 person content (if the game has it), not 8 person content. The 8 person content in Ashes will be designed around one group consisting of one of each of the primary archetypes.
Off tank is not a bad thing, they can do quite good DPS and help Tank mobs if needed. Mechanics like second threat getting hit, threat drop mechanics on the main tank, debuffs that stack, shared cleave, are all simple mechanics where having an off tank is a good thing.
Maybe off tanks and extra support is silly to have in a "standard" group for dungeons, but I just feel like 8 man standard groups will be quite DPS heavy and nuke tactics will be a standard thing.
I know there's speculation about a 'champion' system, but as far as I can tell that was mentioned 2 years ago and hasn't been covered since then.
If it won't be balanced around 1v1 arenas, then imo 1v1 arenas shouldn't be in the game. Or at least, they shouldn't be parts of the game where people can earn rewards (loots, titles, etc).
I'm imagining a future with military nodes all ruled by mages and rogues named "buttfart" and "smellypoo"
For a basic 'empowered strike' ability on a fighter, I would expect some elemental options for the mage secondary, some defensive/threat building options for the tank secondary, some party/individual stat buffs for the bard. For secondaries like Fighter/Rogue/Ranger/Summoner I expect an augment to change the way the attack itself works. That could be "charge up for .5 seconds and deal 1.5x the damage", "smaller range but significantly more backstab damage", "smaller damage but double the range", or "summon a floating weapon that does 2x the damage over 5 seconds".
These are all things that don't drastically change the ability, but if similar augments are given to each of the fighter's abilities each class could end up actually unique.
I'm not really worried about this considering that 1) parties will be balanced around 1 of each archetype and 2) augments are intended to 'blur the lines' between roles, so every 1/1/6 party won't function the same.
In PvP you would need to have a way to prevent the melee carpet from forming otherwise ranged classes are going to be preferred. In theory you use your Tank class with AoE directional blocks but I have yet to see this actually work and be a thing in any game.
What I'm wondering about, a bit off topic, is whether Cleric as a primary archetype will be able to specialize in damage enough to fill a DPS role? Thinking about Shadow Disciple, but I don't want to fill a healer role.
Most likely you would still be doing some healing. And you would probably want to be grouping with a bunch of x/Clerics.
Don't expect to be able to out DPS the Rogue/x in an 8-person group.
Arenas in general are not somewhere where you can earn loot.
If a raid has a need for a second tank (aggro play from mobs in any form, bosses that need to be kept apart, adds that require a tank etc), then you take a second tank - not an off tank. I have never once seen a situation in which a half tank is needed. If the mobs are so weak that you don't need a full tank, then you also don't need a half tank.
As to your last statement
[quote[but I just feel like 8 man standard groups will be quite DPS heavy and nuke tactics will be a standard thing.[/quote}I am unsure why this what you mean. Groups will be DPS heavy in comparison to a game like WoW (a WoW group has 3 DPS, an Ashes group has 6 DPS/support). However, obviously, the mobs in the game will be tuned to groups of 6 DPS/support, not to groups of 3 DPS.