Vyril wrote: » SirChancelot wrote: » Vyril wrote: » Depraved wrote: » fournity hahaha a healer is a support btw.. daveywavey wrote: » Vyril wrote: » George_Black wrote: » That's the plan. There is no trinity in AoC. They've specifically have said "trinity". Even in the last live stream. Tank, DPS, Support (healing). But with that said it's more likely 4. Tank, DPS, Support, Healing. It will really come down to if they make bard a primary healer, or strictly support. A trinity of four..... Correct, but not all support are healers. You probably won't do as well without a cleric. So holy trinity is Tank, DPS, Cleric. Then you add support. 8 man groups add 5 more besides the trinity. Most high end content probably won't need two tanks. Maybe a fighter off-tank. A good chance for 2 clerics and likely a Bard support. The rest dps/support classes. Bard will likely be so good at support it will be mandatory. Quadrality But the showcases and the most complete archetypes are clearly trinity, and the balance will expand from there. We still don't know the extent of what secondary archetypes will be able to change the primary. A fighter/tank may be able to tank group content if he is built to tank. A bard/cleric could be able to heal a group of their skill choices focus on that. This is true, but if a Tank can't do what it's primary role is better than an augmented fighter/tank can do. That's crap design. Bard currently by known information is support first class, and if it can heal as a Bard/Cleric it should also not be better than a Cleric because once again it's a crap design. Could you get away with it in some content? Sure, but high-end content, not likely. You shouldn't devalue the archetypes primary role. That will be a feel bad moment for those players.
SirChancelot wrote: » Vyril wrote: » Depraved wrote: » fournity hahaha a healer is a support btw.. daveywavey wrote: » Vyril wrote: » George_Black wrote: » That's the plan. There is no trinity in AoC. They've specifically have said "trinity". Even in the last live stream. Tank, DPS, Support (healing). But with that said it's more likely 4. Tank, DPS, Support, Healing. It will really come down to if they make bard a primary healer, or strictly support. A trinity of four..... Correct, but not all support are healers. You probably won't do as well without a cleric. So holy trinity is Tank, DPS, Cleric. Then you add support. 8 man groups add 5 more besides the trinity. Most high end content probably won't need two tanks. Maybe a fighter off-tank. A good chance for 2 clerics and likely a Bard support. The rest dps/support classes. Bard will likely be so good at support it will be mandatory. Quadrality But the showcases and the most complete archetypes are clearly trinity, and the balance will expand from there. We still don't know the extent of what secondary archetypes will be able to change the primary. A fighter/tank may be able to tank group content if he is built to tank. A bard/cleric could be able to heal a group of their skill choices focus on that.
Vyril wrote: » Depraved wrote: » fournity hahaha a healer is a support btw.. daveywavey wrote: » Vyril wrote: » George_Black wrote: » That's the plan. There is no trinity in AoC. They've specifically have said "trinity". Even in the last live stream. Tank, DPS, Support (healing). But with that said it's more likely 4. Tank, DPS, Support, Healing. It will really come down to if they make bard a primary healer, or strictly support. A trinity of four..... Correct, but not all support are healers. You probably won't do as well without a cleric. So holy trinity is Tank, DPS, Cleric. Then you add support. 8 man groups add 5 more besides the trinity. Most high end content probably won't need two tanks. Maybe a fighter off-tank. A good chance for 2 clerics and likely a Bard support. The rest dps/support classes. Bard will likely be so good at support it will be mandatory. Quadrality But the showcases and the most complete archetypes are clearly trinity, and the balance will expand from there.
Depraved wrote: » fournity hahaha a healer is a support btw..
daveywavey wrote: » Vyril wrote: » George_Black wrote: » That's the plan. There is no trinity in AoC. They've specifically have said "trinity". Even in the last live stream. Tank, DPS, Support (healing). But with that said it's more likely 4. Tank, DPS, Support, Healing. It will really come down to if they make bard a primary healer, or strictly support. A trinity of four.....
Vyril wrote: » George_Black wrote: » That's the plan. There is no trinity in AoC. They've specifically have said "trinity". Even in the last live stream. Tank, DPS, Support (healing). But with that said it's more likely 4. Tank, DPS, Support, Healing. It will really come down to if they make bard a primary healer, or strictly support.
George_Black wrote: » That's the plan. There is no trinity in AoC.
Vyril wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Vyril wrote: » SirChancelot wrote: » Vyril wrote: » Depraved wrote: » fournity hahaha a healer is a support btw.. daveywavey wrote: » Vyril wrote: » George_Black wrote: » That's the plan. There is no trinity in AoC. They've specifically have said "trinity". Even in the last live stream. Tank, DPS, Support (healing). But with that said it's more likely 4. Tank, DPS, Support, Healing. It will really come down to if they make bard a primary healer, or strictly support. A trinity of four..... Correct, but not all support are healers. You probably won't do as well without a cleric. So holy trinity is Tank, DPS, Cleric. Then you add support. 8 man groups add 5 more besides the trinity. Most high end content probably won't need two tanks. Maybe a fighter off-tank. A good chance for 2 clerics and likely a Bard support. The rest dps/support classes. Bard will likely be so good at support it will be mandatory. Quadrality But the showcases and the most complete archetypes are clearly trinity, and the balance will expand from there. We still don't know the extent of what secondary archetypes will be able to change the primary. A fighter/tank may be able to tank group content if he is built to tank. A bard/cleric could be able to heal a group of their skill choices focus on that. This is true, but if a Tank can't do what it's primary role is better than an augmented fighter/tank can do. That's crap design. Bard currently by known information is support first class, and if it can heal as a Bard/Cleric it should also not be better than a Cleric because once again it's a crap design. Could you get away with it in some content? Sure, but high-end content, not likely. You shouldn't devalue the archetypes primary role. That will be a feel bad moment for those players. It's not quite like that though. Coming from a similar game... Sometimes a non-optimal tank can suffice because the party composition is full of 'low threat generation DPS'. Sometimes they suffice because the enemy targets primarily don't do a lot of damage but do a lot of negative statuses and the healer's job just falls to 'remove those statuses from whoever has them, but Tanks tend to resist them the most'. Sometimes a Bard is sufficient as a healer because the mitigation and other healing across all other characters is sufficient. This doesn't really feel bad unless it becomes super meta somehow, and with enough enemy variety/ecology, it generally doesn't become very meta. Which game? Which content, and what was the actual group makeup? Let's just say that's true. You're saying content that is designed for the best only Tank archetype could be filled with a non-tank archetype?
Azherae wrote: » Vyril wrote: » SirChancelot wrote: » Vyril wrote: » Depraved wrote: » fournity hahaha a healer is a support btw.. daveywavey wrote: » Vyril wrote: » George_Black wrote: » That's the plan. There is no trinity in AoC. They've specifically have said "trinity". Even in the last live stream. Tank, DPS, Support (healing). But with that said it's more likely 4. Tank, DPS, Support, Healing. It will really come down to if they make bard a primary healer, or strictly support. A trinity of four..... Correct, but not all support are healers. You probably won't do as well without a cleric. So holy trinity is Tank, DPS, Cleric. Then you add support. 8 man groups add 5 more besides the trinity. Most high end content probably won't need two tanks. Maybe a fighter off-tank. A good chance for 2 clerics and likely a Bard support. The rest dps/support classes. Bard will likely be so good at support it will be mandatory. Quadrality But the showcases and the most complete archetypes are clearly trinity, and the balance will expand from there. We still don't know the extent of what secondary archetypes will be able to change the primary. A fighter/tank may be able to tank group content if he is built to tank. A bard/cleric could be able to heal a group of their skill choices focus on that. This is true, but if a Tank can't do what it's primary role is better than an augmented fighter/tank can do. That's crap design. Bard currently by known information is support first class, and if it can heal as a Bard/Cleric it should also not be better than a Cleric because once again it's a crap design. Could you get away with it in some content? Sure, but high-end content, not likely. You shouldn't devalue the archetypes primary role. That will be a feel bad moment for those players. It's not quite like that though. Coming from a similar game... Sometimes a non-optimal tank can suffice because the party composition is full of 'low threat generation DPS'. Sometimes they suffice because the enemy targets primarily don't do a lot of damage but do a lot of negative statuses and the healer's job just falls to 'remove those statuses from whoever has them, but Tanks tend to resist them the most'. Sometimes a Bard is sufficient as a healer because the mitigation and other healing across all other characters is sufficient. This doesn't really feel bad unless it becomes super meta somehow, and with enough enemy variety/ecology, it generally doesn't become very meta.
Azherae wrote: » Vyril wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Vyril wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Vyril wrote: » SirChancelot wrote: » Vyril wrote: » Depraved wrote: » fournity hahaha a healer is a support btw.. daveywavey wrote: » Vyril wrote: » George_Black wrote: » That's the plan. There is no trinity in AoC. They've specifically have said "trinity". Even in the last live stream. Tank, DPS, Support (healing). But with that said it's more likely 4. Tank, DPS, Support, Healing. It will really come down to if they make bard a primary healer, or strictly support. A trinity of four..... Correct, but not all support are healers. You probably won't do as well without a cleric. So holy trinity is Tank, DPS, Cleric. Then you add support. 8 man groups add 5 more besides the trinity. Most high end content probably won't need two tanks. Maybe a fighter off-tank. A good chance for 2 clerics and likely a Bard support. The rest dps/support classes. Bard will likely be so good at support it will be mandatory. Quadrality But the showcases and the most complete archetypes are clearly trinity, and the balance will expand from there. We still don't know the extent of what secondary archetypes will be able to change the primary. A fighter/tank may be able to tank group content if he is built to tank. A bard/cleric could be able to heal a group of their skill choices focus on that. This is true, but if a Tank can't do what it's primary role is better than an augmented fighter/tank can do. That's crap design. Bard currently by known information is support first class, and if it can heal as a Bard/Cleric it should also not be better than a Cleric because once again it's a crap design. Could you get away with it in some content? Sure, but high-end content, not likely. You shouldn't devalue the archetypes primary role. That will be a feel bad moment for those players. It's not quite like that though. Coming from a similar game... Sometimes a non-optimal tank can suffice because the party composition is full of 'low threat generation DPS'. Sometimes they suffice because the enemy targets primarily don't do a lot of damage but do a lot of negative statuses and the healer's job just falls to 'remove those statuses from whoever has them, but Tanks tend to resist them the most'. Sometimes a Bard is sufficient as a healer because the mitigation and other healing across all other characters is sufficient. This doesn't really feel bad unless it becomes super meta somehow, and with enough enemy variety/ecology, it generally doesn't become very meta. Which game? Which content, and what was the actual group makeup? Let's just say that's true. You're saying content that is designed for the best tank archetype should be filled with a non-tank archetype? ok... I didn't say that and neither does Intrepid. Though those situations do exist. Niche tanking is absolutely a thing. But the entire point is that it's niche. When you form a guild or even a static group, you don't go 'Ok we only need this BRD/NIN to tank everything so we don't need any PLD'. That doesn't mean that there aren't entire sessions where the PLD isn't on where you go 'eh it's fine we'll go up to Fei'Yin and the BRD/NIN can just tank everything'. There are quite often situations where the optimal Tank is not the Tank, but 'optimal' is not 'reliable'. Vyril wrote: » SirChancelot wrote: » Vyril wrote: » Depraved wrote: » fournity hahaha a healer is a support btw.. daveywavey wrote: » Vyril wrote: » George_Black wrote: » That's the plan. There is no trinity in AoC. They've specifically have said "trinity". Even in the last live stream. Tank, DPS, Support (healing). But with that said it's more likely 4. Tank, DPS, Support, Healing. It will really come down to if they make bard a primary healer, or strictly support. A trinity of four..... Correct, but not all support are healers. You probably won't do as well without a cleric. So holy trinity is Tank, DPS, Cleric. Then you add support. 8 man groups add 5 more besides the trinity. Most high end content probably won't need two tanks. Maybe a fighter off-tank. A good chance for 2 clerics and likely a Bard support. The rest dps/support classes. Bard will likely be so good at support it will be mandatory. Quadrality But the showcases and the most complete archetypes are clearly trinity, and the balance will expand from there. We still don't know the extent of what secondary archetypes will be able to change the primary. A fighter/tank may be able to tank group content if he is built to tank. A bard/cleric could be able to heal a group of their skill choices focus on that. Could you get away with it in some content? Sure, but high-end content, not likely. Ok, that's why I did make an exception in my previous statement. Right but tanking and healing in particular aren't like this because the 'Tank' is 'whoever has the best damage mitigation when the group's tactics are applied' and 'healing' depends mostly on that too. Intrepid says we will get different types of Tanks. In order for this to work, as I see it, there will definitely end up being situations where Mage/Tank is better than Tank/Mage. It just won't matter because 90% of the people who want to tank that content are just going to go to their Node/house, respec to Tank/Mage from Tank/Whatever they were and tank it. Whereas the Mage/Tank would have to do a lot of stuff. I bet they'd still be better at that high end content even, but I don't expect the Tank to be crying about it.
Vyril wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Vyril wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Vyril wrote: » SirChancelot wrote: » Vyril wrote: » Depraved wrote: » fournity hahaha a healer is a support btw.. daveywavey wrote: » Vyril wrote: » George_Black wrote: » That's the plan. There is no trinity in AoC. They've specifically have said "trinity". Even in the last live stream. Tank, DPS, Support (healing). But with that said it's more likely 4. Tank, DPS, Support, Healing. It will really come down to if they make bard a primary healer, or strictly support. A trinity of four..... Correct, but not all support are healers. You probably won't do as well without a cleric. So holy trinity is Tank, DPS, Cleric. Then you add support. 8 man groups add 5 more besides the trinity. Most high end content probably won't need two tanks. Maybe a fighter off-tank. A good chance for 2 clerics and likely a Bard support. The rest dps/support classes. Bard will likely be so good at support it will be mandatory. Quadrality But the showcases and the most complete archetypes are clearly trinity, and the balance will expand from there. We still don't know the extent of what secondary archetypes will be able to change the primary. A fighter/tank may be able to tank group content if he is built to tank. A bard/cleric could be able to heal a group of their skill choices focus on that. This is true, but if a Tank can't do what it's primary role is better than an augmented fighter/tank can do. That's crap design. Bard currently by known information is support first class, and if it can heal as a Bard/Cleric it should also not be better than a Cleric because once again it's a crap design. Could you get away with it in some content? Sure, but high-end content, not likely. You shouldn't devalue the archetypes primary role. That will be a feel bad moment for those players. It's not quite like that though. Coming from a similar game... Sometimes a non-optimal tank can suffice because the party composition is full of 'low threat generation DPS'. Sometimes they suffice because the enemy targets primarily don't do a lot of damage but do a lot of negative statuses and the healer's job just falls to 'remove those statuses from whoever has them, but Tanks tend to resist them the most'. Sometimes a Bard is sufficient as a healer because the mitigation and other healing across all other characters is sufficient. This doesn't really feel bad unless it becomes super meta somehow, and with enough enemy variety/ecology, it generally doesn't become very meta. Which game? Which content, and what was the actual group makeup? Let's just say that's true. You're saying content that is designed for the best tank archetype should be filled with a non-tank archetype? ok... I didn't say that and neither does Intrepid. Though those situations do exist. Niche tanking is absolutely a thing. But the entire point is that it's niche. When you form a guild or even a static group, you don't go 'Ok we only need this BRD/NIN to tank everything so we don't need any PLD'. That doesn't mean that there aren't entire sessions where the PLD isn't on where you go 'eh it's fine we'll go up to Fei'Yin and the BRD/NIN can just tank everything'. There are quite often situations where the optimal Tank is not the Tank, but 'optimal' is not 'reliable'. Vyril wrote: » SirChancelot wrote: » Vyril wrote: » Depraved wrote: » fournity hahaha a healer is a support btw.. daveywavey wrote: » Vyril wrote: » George_Black wrote: » That's the plan. There is no trinity in AoC. They've specifically have said "trinity". Even in the last live stream. Tank, DPS, Support (healing). But with that said it's more likely 4. Tank, DPS, Support, Healing. It will really come down to if they make bard a primary healer, or strictly support. A trinity of four..... Correct, but not all support are healers. You probably won't do as well without a cleric. So holy trinity is Tank, DPS, Cleric. Then you add support. 8 man groups add 5 more besides the trinity. Most high end content probably won't need two tanks. Maybe a fighter off-tank. A good chance for 2 clerics and likely a Bard support. The rest dps/support classes. Bard will likely be so good at support it will be mandatory. Quadrality But the showcases and the most complete archetypes are clearly trinity, and the balance will expand from there. We still don't know the extent of what secondary archetypes will be able to change the primary. A fighter/tank may be able to tank group content if he is built to tank. A bard/cleric could be able to heal a group of their skill choices focus on that. Could you get away with it in some content? Sure, but high-end content, not likely. Ok, that's why I did make an exception in my previous statement.
Azherae wrote: » Vyril wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Vyril wrote: » SirChancelot wrote: » Vyril wrote: » Depraved wrote: » fournity hahaha a healer is a support btw.. daveywavey wrote: » Vyril wrote: » George_Black wrote: » That's the plan. There is no trinity in AoC. They've specifically have said "trinity". Even in the last live stream. Tank, DPS, Support (healing). But with that said it's more likely 4. Tank, DPS, Support, Healing. It will really come down to if they make bard a primary healer, or strictly support. A trinity of four..... Correct, but not all support are healers. You probably won't do as well without a cleric. So holy trinity is Tank, DPS, Cleric. Then you add support. 8 man groups add 5 more besides the trinity. Most high end content probably won't need two tanks. Maybe a fighter off-tank. A good chance for 2 clerics and likely a Bard support. The rest dps/support classes. Bard will likely be so good at support it will be mandatory. Quadrality But the showcases and the most complete archetypes are clearly trinity, and the balance will expand from there. We still don't know the extent of what secondary archetypes will be able to change the primary. A fighter/tank may be able to tank group content if he is built to tank. A bard/cleric could be able to heal a group of their skill choices focus on that. This is true, but if a Tank can't do what it's primary role is better than an augmented fighter/tank can do. That's crap design. Bard currently by known information is support first class, and if it can heal as a Bard/Cleric it should also not be better than a Cleric because once again it's a crap design. Could you get away with it in some content? Sure, but high-end content, not likely. You shouldn't devalue the archetypes primary role. That will be a feel bad moment for those players. It's not quite like that though. Coming from a similar game... Sometimes a non-optimal tank can suffice because the party composition is full of 'low threat generation DPS'. Sometimes they suffice because the enemy targets primarily don't do a lot of damage but do a lot of negative statuses and the healer's job just falls to 'remove those statuses from whoever has them, but Tanks tend to resist them the most'. Sometimes a Bard is sufficient as a healer because the mitigation and other healing across all other characters is sufficient. This doesn't really feel bad unless it becomes super meta somehow, and with enough enemy variety/ecology, it generally doesn't become very meta. Which game? Which content, and what was the actual group makeup? Let's just say that's true. You're saying content that is designed for the best tank archetype should be filled with a non-tank archetype? ok... I didn't say that and neither does Intrepid. Though those situations do exist. Niche tanking is absolutely a thing. But the entire point is that it's niche. When you form a guild or even a static group, you don't go 'Ok we only need this BRD/NIN to tank everything so we don't need any PLD'. That doesn't mean that there aren't entire sessions where the PLD isn't on where you go 'eh it's fine we'll go up to Fei'Yin and the BRD/NIN can just tank everything'. There are quite often situations where the optimal Tank is not the Tank, but 'optimal' is not 'reliable'.
Vyril wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Vyril wrote: » SirChancelot wrote: » Vyril wrote: » Depraved wrote: » fournity hahaha a healer is a support btw.. daveywavey wrote: » Vyril wrote: » George_Black wrote: » That's the plan. There is no trinity in AoC. They've specifically have said "trinity". Even in the last live stream. Tank, DPS, Support (healing). But with that said it's more likely 4. Tank, DPS, Support, Healing. It will really come down to if they make bard a primary healer, or strictly support. A trinity of four..... Correct, but not all support are healers. You probably won't do as well without a cleric. So holy trinity is Tank, DPS, Cleric. Then you add support. 8 man groups add 5 more besides the trinity. Most high end content probably won't need two tanks. Maybe a fighter off-tank. A good chance for 2 clerics and likely a Bard support. The rest dps/support classes. Bard will likely be so good at support it will be mandatory. Quadrality But the showcases and the most complete archetypes are clearly trinity, and the balance will expand from there. We still don't know the extent of what secondary archetypes will be able to change the primary. A fighter/tank may be able to tank group content if he is built to tank. A bard/cleric could be able to heal a group of their skill choices focus on that. This is true, but if a Tank can't do what it's primary role is better than an augmented fighter/tank can do. That's crap design. Bard currently by known information is support first class, and if it can heal as a Bard/Cleric it should also not be better than a Cleric because once again it's a crap design. Could you get away with it in some content? Sure, but high-end content, not likely. You shouldn't devalue the archetypes primary role. That will be a feel bad moment for those players. It's not quite like that though. Coming from a similar game... Sometimes a non-optimal tank can suffice because the party composition is full of 'low threat generation DPS'. Sometimes they suffice because the enemy targets primarily don't do a lot of damage but do a lot of negative statuses and the healer's job just falls to 'remove those statuses from whoever has them, but Tanks tend to resist them the most'. Sometimes a Bard is sufficient as a healer because the mitigation and other healing across all other characters is sufficient. This doesn't really feel bad unless it becomes super meta somehow, and with enough enemy variety/ecology, it generally doesn't become very meta. Which game? Which content, and what was the actual group makeup? Let's just say that's true. You're saying content that is designed for the best tank archetype should be filled with a non-tank archetype? ok...
Vyril wrote: » SirChancelot wrote: » Vyril wrote: » Depraved wrote: » fournity hahaha a healer is a support btw.. daveywavey wrote: » Vyril wrote: » George_Black wrote: » That's the plan. There is no trinity in AoC. They've specifically have said "trinity". Even in the last live stream. Tank, DPS, Support (healing). But with that said it's more likely 4. Tank, DPS, Support, Healing. It will really come down to if they make bard a primary healer, or strictly support. A trinity of four..... Correct, but not all support are healers. You probably won't do as well without a cleric. So holy trinity is Tank, DPS, Cleric. Then you add support. 8 man groups add 5 more besides the trinity. Most high end content probably won't need two tanks. Maybe a fighter off-tank. A good chance for 2 clerics and likely a Bard support. The rest dps/support classes. Bard will likely be so good at support it will be mandatory. Quadrality But the showcases and the most complete archetypes are clearly trinity, and the balance will expand from there. We still don't know the extent of what secondary archetypes will be able to change the primary. A fighter/tank may be able to tank group content if he is built to tank. A bard/cleric could be able to heal a group of their skill choices focus on that. Could you get away with it in some content? Sure, but high-end content, not likely.
Bards are intended to amplify a party or raid's ability to perform within their own class. That amplification isn't just intended for DPS, but also for support, for healing, for taking damage, for movement. Bards have often been portrayed as a musical class and while they can be that, many Bard applications may exist in just telling a story. Telling a story is going to be the thematic component of how the Bard interacts with the party. And that story is going to enhance player's abilities to perform. Very similar in a way to buffing up a party, but you are not going to see him as a "buff bot" that you might have experienced in previous games, where they are only good for their buffs and then you kick them out of party and they sit in a corner and come back in 30 minutes. Those buffs are going to be related to how they perform.[3] – Steven SharifBard fills a non-healing support role that makes a party better as a whole through a range of buff-oriented and proximity based abilities.[4][5][6] Q: Regarding the class composition and design revolving around the Holy Trinity, if that is the case where does a non-healing support fall into that concept of design and how will players who choose that path remain relevant throughout the gameplay loops? A: This is a more old school idea of the Holy Trinity and where non-healing support classes fall into that mix. Generally you see in my experience most non-healing support classes fall into between the hybrid of support to tank or support to DPS, so they tend to fill a hybrid role. The Bard has an opportunity to fill that space and is a very integral component to maximizing a particular group or archetypes ability to perform through the use of their supportive and buff-oriented abilities as we've talked in the past. Many of these are support based on proximity. Some of them are support based on targeted buffs. We're going to be following the format of abilities that adhere to dances, songs, and stories when it relates to the Bard; and the scope of their particular ability sets- each of those provide a certain type of benefit to to other characters within proximity. The idea here again, pointing back to a more old-school trinity design is that no party is complete without the non-healing support class, which is the Bard in Ashes of Creation.[4] – Steven Sharif
SirChancelot wrote: » Why do you think their is going to be a singular best, if their whole game design is to avoid a meta. What may be the best tank for one boss won't be the best tank for a different zone.
SirChancelot wrote: » Sure doubling down on tank/tank may be the tankiest tank to ever tank by being the hardest to kill, but you're giving up bringing any extra utilities to the group. Maybe you want the mage augments for specific magic resist or elemental protections... Or maybe a full defensive mage/tank might be better for such a magic heavy zone.
Vyril wrote: » SirChancelot wrote: » Why do you think their is going to be a singular best, if their whole game design is to avoid a meta. What may be the best tank for one boss won't be the best tank for a different zone. Imagine spending 20 years perfecting something, you have all the skills, tools, and resources to do the job the better than anyone else. Then I come along with 2 years, broken tools, poor skills, and minimal resources and you get fired, and I take your job and pay. Avoiding meta, isn't building the trinity with archetypes as the balance metric. SirChancelot wrote: » Sure doubling down on tank/tank may be the tankiest tank to ever tank by being the hardest to kill, but you're giving up bringing any extra utilities to the group. Maybe you want the mage augments for specific magic resist or elemental protections... Or maybe a full defensive mage/tank might be better for such a magic heavy zone. Augments will still be VERY useful in tackling content, but a Tank/Mage could be the better Magic tank instead of going Tank / Fighter where it's a better physical tank. But in the end the Tank is still the best tank.
Percimes wrote: » Alas, I guess it was to be expected my lament on the accessory and interchangeability perception of the DPS role would fly over everyone's head. Oh well, I'll be in the tavern until the blessed ones deem my presence acceptable of their radiance.
Percimes wrote: » It's not Intrepid I doubt, I'm sure they'll make everything they can so each archetypes have their place and are fun to play. It's the playerbase mindset, or a subset of it, that worries me at time.
Azherae wrote: » Percimes wrote: » It's not Intrepid I doubt, I'm sure they'll make everything they can so each archetypes have their place and are fun to play. It's the playerbase mindset, or a subset of it, that worries me at time. Oh, wait, were you talking about like, a grouping where you don't actually add all 8 players? Just going to do something with 6, and every time that happens, Ranger or Summoner for example gets left out because they aren't as good as Fighter or Rogue (or just 'ok guys let's get 2 Fighters, one Fighter/Rogue and one Fighter/Ranger because who needs those Primary Archetypes in this case anyway lol')?
SirChancelot wrote: » Vyril wrote: » SirChancelot wrote: » Why do you think their is going to be a singular best, if their whole game design is to avoid a meta. What may be the best tank for one boss won't be the best tank for a different zone. Imagine spending 20 years perfecting something, you have all the skills, tools, and resources to do the job the better than anyone else. Then I come along with 2 years, broken tools, poor skills, and minimal resources and you get fired, and I take your job and pay. Avoiding meta, isn't building the trinity with archetypes as the balance metric. SirChancelot wrote: » Sure doubling down on tank/tank may be the tankiest tank to ever tank by being the hardest to kill, but you're giving up bringing any extra utilities to the group. Maybe you want the mage augments for specific magic resist or elemental protections... Or maybe a full defensive mage/tank might be better for such a magic heavy zone. Augments will still be VERY useful in tackling content, but a Tank/Mage could be the better Magic tank instead of going Tank / Fighter where it's a better physical tank. But in the end the Tank is still the best tank. I'm not sure what you're getting at with your analogy there... But if I'm understanding it correctly, who is to say the mage hasn't spent 40 years perfecting defensive magics and barriers making himself just as hard to kill as any tank? Again, I'm not saying I'm right and you're wrong, all I'm saying is I've started this argument thread before, and there are plenty of dev quotes that leave role flexibility to be determined... I personally think it would be poor design to have a primary archetype locked to a party role so completely. Either way, we have to see how much augments can let us blur a characters role because currently we have any examples of how they can "radically change an ability" -Steven If you want to read the last time I started this.https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/51718/archetype-roles-i-swear-im-not-crazy/p1 *Edited to add link*
Vyril wrote: » SirChancelot wrote: » Vyril wrote: » SirChancelot wrote: » Why do you think their is going to be a singular best, if their whole game design is to avoid a meta. What may be the best tank for one boss won't be the best tank for a different zone. Imagine spending 20 years perfecting something, you have all the skills, tools, and resources to do the job the better than anyone else. Then I come along with 2 years, broken tools, poor skills, and minimal resources and you get fired, and I take your job and pay. Avoiding meta, isn't building the trinity with archetypes as the balance metric. SirChancelot wrote: » Sure doubling down on tank/tank may be the tankiest tank to ever tank by being the hardest to kill, but you're giving up bringing any extra utilities to the group. Maybe you want the mage augments for specific magic resist or elemental protections... Or maybe a full defensive mage/tank might be better for such a magic heavy zone. Augments will still be VERY useful in tackling content, but a Tank/Mage could be the better Magic tank instead of going Tank / Fighter where it's a better physical tank. But in the end the Tank is still the best tank. I'm not sure what you're getting at with your analogy there... But if I'm understanding it correctly, who is to say the mage hasn't spent 40 years perfecting defensive magics and barriers making himself just as hard to kill as any tank? Again, I'm not saying I'm right and you're wrong, all I'm saying is I've started this argument thread before, and there are plenty of dev quotes that leave role flexibility to be determined... I personally think it would be poor design to have a primary archetype locked to a party role so completely. Either way, we have to see how much augments can let us blur a characters role because currently we have any examples of how they can "radically change an ability" -Steven If you want to read the last time I started this.https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/51718/archetype-roles-i-swear-im-not-crazy/p1 *Edited to add link* Should a TANK augmented Class be top DPS?
SirChancelot wrote: » Vyril wrote: » SirChancelot wrote: » Vyril wrote: » SirChancelot wrote: » Why do you think their is going to be a singular best, if their whole game design is to avoid a meta. What may be the best tank for one boss won't be the best tank for a different zone. Imagine spending 20 years perfecting something, you have all the skills, tools, and resources to do the job the better than anyone else. Then I come along with 2 years, broken tools, poor skills, and minimal resources and you get fired, and I take your job and pay. Avoiding meta, isn't building the trinity with archetypes as the balance metric. SirChancelot wrote: » Sure doubling down on tank/tank may be the tankiest tank to ever tank by being the hardest to kill, but you're giving up bringing any extra utilities to the group. Maybe you want the mage augments for specific magic resist or elemental protections... Or maybe a full defensive mage/tank might be better for such a magic heavy zone. Augments will still be VERY useful in tackling content, but a Tank/Mage could be the better Magic tank instead of going Tank / Fighter where it's a better physical tank. But in the end the Tank is still the best tank. I'm not sure what you're getting at with your analogy there... But if I'm understanding it correctly, who is to say the mage hasn't spent 40 years perfecting defensive magics and barriers making himself just as hard to kill as any tank? Again, I'm not saying I'm right and you're wrong, all I'm saying is I've started this argument thread before, and there are plenty of dev quotes that leave role flexibility to be determined... I personally think it would be poor design to have a primary archetype locked to a party role so completely. Either way, we have to see how much augments can let us blur a characters role because currently we have any examples of how they can "radically change an ability" -Steven If you want to read the last time I started this.https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/51718/archetype-roles-i-swear-im-not-crazy/p1 *Edited to add link* Should a TANK augmented Class be top DPS? You're really not getting the picture here. Sure if you hyper focus on just DPS and look to min max a glass cannon, of course a mage/mage should do more damage than a tank/mage. But maybe top DPS on a target dummy isn't always the best approach. Maybe I want to play a melee magic bruiser, so I use a tank/mage. I like the engage and CC, but add all the elemental effects to my abilities and focus all my gear for dealing damage instead of being a raid tank. That should be a viable gameplay choice. There should be more factors at play than big number = better... Otherwise I feel like it would be actually be poor game design...
Vyril wrote: » SirChancelot wrote: » Vyril wrote: » SirChancelot wrote: » Vyril wrote: » SirChancelot wrote: » Why do you think their is going to be a singular best, if their whole game design is to avoid a meta. What may be the best tank for one boss won't be the best tank for a different zone. Imagine spending 20 years perfecting something, you have all the skills, tools, and resources to do the job the better than anyone else. Then I come along with 2 years, broken tools, poor skills, and minimal resources and you get fired, and I take your job and pay. Avoiding meta, isn't building the trinity with archetypes as the balance metric. SirChancelot wrote: » Sure doubling down on tank/tank may be the tankiest tank to ever tank by being the hardest to kill, but you're giving up bringing any extra utilities to the group. Maybe you want the mage augments for specific magic resist or elemental protections... Or maybe a full defensive mage/tank might be better for such a magic heavy zone. Augments will still be VERY useful in tackling content, but a Tank/Mage could be the better Magic tank instead of going Tank / Fighter where it's a better physical tank. But in the end the Tank is still the best tank. I'm not sure what you're getting at with your analogy there... But if I'm understanding it correctly, who is to say the mage hasn't spent 40 years perfecting defensive magics and barriers making himself just as hard to kill as any tank? Again, I'm not saying I'm right and you're wrong, all I'm saying is I've started this argument thread before, and there are plenty of dev quotes that leave role flexibility to be determined... I personally think it would be poor design to have a primary archetype locked to a party role so completely. Either way, we have to see how much augments can let us blur a characters role because currently we have any examples of how they can "radically change an ability" -Steven If you want to read the last time I started this.https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/51718/archetype-roles-i-swear-im-not-crazy/p1 *Edited to add link* Should a TANK augmented Class be top DPS? You're really not getting the picture here. Sure if you hyper focus on just DPS and look to min max a glass cannon, of course a mage/mage should do more damage than a tank/mage. But maybe top DPS on a target dummy isn't always the best approach. Maybe I want to play a melee magic bruiser, so I use a tank/mage. I like the engage and CC, but add all the elemental effects to my abilities and focus all my gear for dealing damage instead of being a raid tank. That should be a viable gameplay choice. There should be more factors at play than big number = better... Otherwise I feel like it would be actually be poor game design... I get it, but I wanted to know the answer. Because it relates to why would a Fighter / Tank be a better tank than the actual Tank/ANYCLASS. Same goes for Cleric, who should heal better than a Cleric?Cleric classes are the only classes that can fill the role of a primary healer.[9] Classes with Cleric as a secondary archetype will have self-healing benefits as well as limited healing benefits to other players.[9][10][11][12] Don't these Archetypes fit the definition of the holy trinity? I get other classes can possibly do these roles SORT OF, but not better and they shouldn't. Especially at the highest level content. All I'm asking is for you to answer.
SirChancelot wrote: » Vyril wrote: » SirChancelot wrote: » Vyril wrote: » SirChancelot wrote: » Vyril wrote: » SirChancelot wrote: » Why do you think their is going to be a singular best, if their whole game design is to avoid a meta. What may be the best tank for one boss won't be the best tank for a different zone. Imagine spending 20 years perfecting something, you have all the skills, tools, and resources to do the job the better than anyone else. Then I come along with 2 years, broken tools, poor skills, and minimal resources and you get fired, and I take your job and pay. Avoiding meta, isn't building the trinity with archetypes as the balance metric. SirChancelot wrote: » Sure doubling down on tank/tank may be the tankiest tank to ever tank by being the hardest to kill, but you're giving up bringing any extra utilities to the group. Maybe you want the mage augments for specific magic resist or elemental protections... Or maybe a full defensive mage/tank might be better for such a magic heavy zone. Augments will still be VERY useful in tackling content, but a Tank/Mage could be the better Magic tank instead of going Tank / Fighter where it's a better physical tank. But in the end the Tank is still the best tank. I'm not sure what you're getting at with your analogy there... But if I'm understanding it correctly, who is to say the mage hasn't spent 40 years perfecting defensive magics and barriers making himself just as hard to kill as any tank? Again, I'm not saying I'm right and you're wrong, all I'm saying is I've started this argument thread before, and there are plenty of dev quotes that leave role flexibility to be determined... I personally think it would be poor design to have a primary archetype locked to a party role so completely. Either way, we have to see how much augments can let us blur a characters role because currently we have any examples of how they can "radically change an ability" -Steven If you want to read the last time I started this.https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/51718/archetype-roles-i-swear-im-not-crazy/p1 *Edited to add link* Should a TANK augmented Class be top DPS? You're really not getting the picture here. Sure if you hyper focus on just DPS and look to min max a glass cannon, of course a mage/mage should do more damage than a tank/mage. But maybe top DPS on a target dummy isn't always the best approach. Maybe I want to play a melee magic bruiser, so I use a tank/mage. I like the engage and CC, but add all the elemental effects to my abilities and focus all my gear for dealing damage instead of being a raid tank. That should be a viable gameplay choice. There should be more factors at play than big number = better... Otherwise I feel like it would be actually be poor game design... I get it, but I wanted to know the answer. Because it relates to why would a Fighter / Tank be a better tank than the actual Tank/ANYCLASS. Same goes for Cleric, who should heal better than a Cleric?Cleric classes are the only classes that can fill the role of a primary healer.[9] Classes with Cleric as a secondary archetype will have self-healing benefits as well as limited healing benefits to other players.[9][10][11][12] Don't these Archetypes fit the definition of the holy trinity? I get other classes can possibly do these roles SORT OF, but not better and they shouldn't. Especially at the highest level content. All I'm asking is for you to answer. I did answer, I said a mage/mage should be better at raw DPS than a mage/tank...because that is what you want to hear... But I'm hoping there's more to building a character than that, because if that's all there is to it, then there is nothing inspiring or new here. If the mage in a group just needs to do raw magic damage then the best option is likely to always be mage/mage, why would you ever try anything else... And that would just be a waste of their primary/secondary system. So what you're asking me to answer, in my opinion, is the same as saying who should have better melee DPS, a rogue or fighter? They're DIFFERENT, they have different gameplay, and that is what I am after. I want to be able to build different approaches to classes and have them be viable. Let's go with bard/cleric, I feel like he should be able to heal in group content. Will he have the same max HPS as a cleric/cleric? no, and I'm not saying he should... But he could/would have more utility for the group being able to apply buffs and each buff now gives a stacking HoT due to the cleric augments. (Theoretical example I know). Maybe with the constant speed and dmg buffs combined with the healing allows a group to clear areas quicker than the group with the cleric/cleric who can heal harder. It's all a slider to me going from Cleric/cleric -> cleric/bard -> bard/cleric -> bard/bard. How much heal to support do you want/need in your group.
Vyril wrote: » My questions were about Tank vs Fighter/Tank. And about how you can't replace a cleric.
Vyril wrote: » High end content will require a Tank, Cleric, and likely a Bard. Damage will be dependent on content.
Vyril wrote: » Damage classes will obviously be a mix and match on damage because in the holy trinity they fit the damage roll, not a healing or tank. But mages, rangers, rogues, fighters will likely all have their pro and cons as dps. You won't replace dps with a tank or cleric.
Vyril wrote: » You initially argued against this and subverted to talk about classes that weren't in question.
Vyril wrote: » My questions were about Tank vs Fighter/Tank.
Vyril wrote: » And about how you can't replace a cleric.
NiKr wrote: » Vyril wrote: » My questions were about Tank vs Fighter/Tank. We don't know the augment school that a tank would provide, but I'd hope one is the "aggro" school and another is a "protection" one. With the aggro school the fighter would be able hold the aggro, but would drastically depend on the healer to keep him alive (which means faster mana consumption and more risk.). With protection school, the aggro goes all over the place, but the party has some defensive buffs. But if they're generally kinda thin on their base defenses - the healer has to overwork again and the party is yet again at a higher risk of dying. Having a tank instead of a fighter/tank would completely negate that, because he'd have both a great aggro kit and a fuller/stronger protection buff kit.
Percimes wrote: » The problem is not generating threat, it's more about being able to regain aggro with only one ability (like taunt) and having the means to mitigate the damage received.
