Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!
Options
Is 64 classes still a good idea?
rikardp98
Member
After seeing the ranger update I'm very confident in IS being able to make some great classes. However, I'm starting to doubt the 64 class model and would rather have around 10-12 well designed and unique classes that is also well balanced (in a group play setting).
64 different classes would be cool, but it will take a lot of work/time and money to make all those classes feel unique, have depth in its gameplay and be a viable option for PvP or PvE. Yes, the biggest hurdle is to create a good base archetype, but making the second archetype feel important and impactful will still be a HUGE hurdle and a big time investment. I'm convinced that IS could make it happen, but I'm not sure if it's worth it?
64 different classes would be cool, but it will take a lot of work/time and money to make all those classes feel unique, have depth in its gameplay and be a viable option for PvP or PvE. Yes, the biggest hurdle is to create a good base archetype, but making the second archetype feel important and impactful will still be a HUGE hurdle and a big time investment. I'm convinced that IS could make it happen, but I'm not sure if it's worth it?
2
Comments
Ashes is a game with 8 classes and parties of 8 people. It's a perfect fit.
Yeah that's why I kind of feel like they shouldn't even bother with the arguments and focus on the base archetype and maybe add one or two more for that extra variety.
I don't think that will change now. I'm excited to see all the variety of builds that will evolve from it
We'll need some build variety though, which is where the augments come in. Balancing an mmo is an impossible task, so I think expecting that is kinda pointless. But having a good variety of options on your abilities is something that would make the game better.
We've yet to see any proper augments, so it's hard to say how long they'd take to develop. But my main point - no additional archetypes. 8 for 8 is the best way to go, otherwise you're facing a much bigger balancing problem of "how da fuck do we balance our archetypes in such a way where some of them don't just get fucked over and never get invited to parties?".
And that will happen if you have over 8 archetypes in a game with only 8 party slots.
Naa that sounds extra boring. They should do their augments and create variety through that. People are to use to WoW style and wanting a simple 8 classes. Only mmorpgs have had many classes / class customization options like shadowbane and rift.
Ranger , warrior, mage, cleric, etc rinse an repeat same boring classes and 0 flavor in every mmorpg.
Each class can potentially have several augmentation branches to choose from depending on augmentation allowances.
I'm saying that it would be better to focus on the main archetype to make it feel complete, and have variety in gameplay and abilities within this completed base archetype. Instead of feeling the need to implement 8 arguments to every spell (or most of them) for every archetype.
Well this will happen oven of there is 8 classes with 8 party slots. People will class stack if some class is stronger than another. Or some class is just much weaker. But yes, more likely if there is more classes to choose from.
Steven keeps saying that augments will somehow bring big changes to abilities, but I'll believe that when I see it. But even if they will - that's gonna be happening waaaay later in A2.
Yes, that possibility is true, but that is a choice of players, while having 9 archetypes but 8 slots is a dev-forced choice, because you physically can't fit 1 of each into a party.
I like to loosely relate it to Diablo 3 Skill Runes.
I do however believe that people will most likely play their class (2 archetype combo) and not their base archetype. And then respect their second archetype to fit what is needed. So technically now you need to fit 64 "classes" into a 8 slots party.
Maybe I'm just miss understanding the small/big impact the argumentations will have.
Yet when it comes to the actual archetype abilities, actual archetype playstyle, there are restrictions on which abilities you can learn due to in innapropriate system for mmos, the skill tree. The same people who want no restrictions on unrealistic combinations are happy with restrictions on core archetypes.
That quote is so old it really carries no weight.
However, you'll more than likely see each secondary pick function like a wow talent specialization.
I agree with this. Think of it this way, WoW has 3 talent trees per class that change the way the base classes are played. We will have 8 per class. Thats an upgrade for the MMO formula. If it takes time, so be it.
The minute someone says anything that is contrary to the above quote, we can freely dismiss it. However, that has not happened as yet.
Thats my understanding of it but will find out more i guess probaly im guessing around Mayish i reckon
Probably metas will surface, with some choices in the skill tree working well with some secondary archetypes but not with others.
Example: Beartrap
Of course these are just examples, but I think it illustrates how augments can be made without massive efforts. I will point at this point what they said in the (I think) Tank showcase, that skills are modular objects that they can easily pull apart and modify portions of, so creating various augmented versions of skills while definitely a time consuming process would at least be possible from a technical point of view.
Yes it's easy to think of what can be done to modify a spell, now do it for the rest of the 20 spells (think we had 20 spells in the ranger preview) and for the other classes. 20*8*8, that's over a thousand spells that they need to modify, create animations (maybe just small changes), FX, and somehow balance it. (Then again, IS are not afraid of a challenge and advanced systems)
Even if its small changes to the abilities, those small changes add up to alot of changes that will take alot of effort and time. I know coding, but I'm not a game developer, and even if IS have a system where these modifications can easily be
made, it will require a lot of work to get right.
This would sum up to a total of
This is a lot of wood to chop, you are absolutely right. So let's look at the ways we were told by Intrepid they tried to streamline their design processes. The reason why this is relevant is that Intrepid, dealing with this huge number of skills indeed cannot afford to start skill design from zero for just the augementations.
1) Art Style Guides - I think this has been brought up in connection with biomes but also classes and gear, how those things follow a previously worked out "style guide books" that lays out forms and colors for certain themes. With this effects, visual and acustics, can be easily reused and modified and added to a database that is the digital image of the style guide book allowing quick access to a special tool kit with which to modify a base skill.
2) Balacing for groups - Direct effects of augmentation could be much less frequent or less effective as they were in my examples above, given that Intrepid seems to aim at group synergies accessing the full potential of skills.
This could mean for example that a trap does not apply "fatal wounds" (which reduces healing the target receives)directly, but inflicts a stackable effect that if stacked fully or combined with a bleed/necrotic effect transfors into the "fatal wound" debuff.
This means that overall Intrepid could create a matrix beforehand and distribute combo pieces for strong effects amongst the classes, so that the art style guide will be expanded by a game mechanic component that further simplifies the final step of designing the augmented skills.
Since Intrepid does not seem rushed about these things, I think it is absolutely in the realm of possibility that they are working on exactly that for the past 1-2 years.
3) Alpha 2 - A lot of what they are doing will come down to looking at the use rates and efficacy during the testing phase. I am by no means fully convinced that the 64 class system will work, but I am optimistic it can; however I am also certain that the augment system will be downsized if it turns out to cause more problems than benefits.
On the other hand, we’ve been surprised by what Intrepid can do in other areas (e.g. the environment and seasons).
We’ll have to see how it plays out in Alpha 2.
My guess for A2 is everything will still be eight (8) classes … with secondary archetypes merely adding “flavor” (Jeff Bard’s quote still holds true).
Point being, that having a large number of classes or class-spec combos isn't a new thing. MMOs have been doing it for a while now. And the end result is that the game will be unbalanced. Which is fine. We're not doing sweaty arena 3v3s or playing Dota 2 or something, it's an MMO and open world PvP in MMOs is inherently unbalanced no matter how many or few classes exist or how well they're designed, because numbers and gear are the deciding balancing factor.
We've also seen systems similar to what AoC is pursuing in games like ArcheAge where your class was formed of your base and secondary archetype, though in AA the combo mattered a lot more than what it appears to in AoC. Remains to be seen. From what I can see so far, your secondary archetype will probably have as much impact on your base class as the weapon and armour you decide to use - which is to say, significant. If they weren't up for the task of simply making these systems, I don't think they'd say they're doing it.
Sure, but currently when looking at the database of wow, retail have 423 class abilities while original wow vanilla only have 260.
What AoC is trying to do is +2000 abilities. Sure most of them will be a modification of one spell, but that is still A LOT of spells you need to make and balance.
But if they make it work, then that would be amazing. I'm just not sure it's worth the time and money they need to spend on it. The current classes they have shown looks amazing and I think that they should stick to that and small varieties within the base archetype fantasy.
how and why would it be better? how are you measuring that? are you implying that if they build the augment system the base classes will feel incomplete? that makes no sense. building one system doesnt mean you neglect another one.
1- and let me tell you that if your concern is time, money and effort, making 2-4 new classes from scratch is much more money, time and effort than changing some properties in some skills. so what you said makes no sense to me.
2- people will stack classes regardless. if you have 10-12 classes, people will pick the strongest for the party anyways. they are balancing around having 1 of each main archetype in the party. if they added more archetypes right now, they would have to go back to the drawing board and figure out what they are going to do now with parties. thats more time, money and effort