Rock (anti burst, burst mitigation, burst healing, high hp): Tanks
Paper (attrition, continuous damage, buffing and continuous healing): Summoners
Scissors (burst damage, high uptime): Rangers, Mages, Rogues
Generalist: Bard (leans paper), Fighter (leans rock)
Sand paper (some rock and some paper): Cleric
Reliance on going first:
1. Rogue
2. Ranger
3. Mage
4. Summoner
5. Fighter
6. Tank
7. Bard
8. Cleric
That's an interesting way of putting it, so how do you propose the generalist and the sand paper would relate with the others and between themselves
That would be augment-dependent.
A High Priest might not have much Attrition at all, but a Templar might at least have enough to wear down a Rogue or even Ranger (Mages would have it easier since they might still be able to absorb mana from a Cleric, weakening their 'Rock' status).
ok i know this is all theorycrafting, but for example in ro the high priest had lots of attrition. they could turn someone into a vegetable basically in a one vs one then slowly kill them atfter like 30-50 hits lol
I've been curious for a long time about how this dynamic would turn out to be and finally decided to guess what it could be like.... What are your thoughts on my result
I'll give my reasoning to my out come starting with what I'm sure about to what I'm least sure about. Disclaimer: We're assuming equally skilled players involved, so please don't bring in arguments like a skilled fighter vs a noob summoner (cause it doesn't matter the Rock-Paper-Scissors dynamic that would always reduce the advantage). Also note that this is between Architypes, not Classes.
Ranger-Tank: In a 1v1, the advantage of the fight goes clearly to the ranger, cause most of the abilities tanks have in their Arsenal are melee, close range. So even if the tank were to use a ranged weapon they would have to rely on crit damage to pose any huge threat to the ranger. One can argue that the Tank could close the gap between them, all the ranger would do is increase the gap again(either by flight or by rooting, not to mention the ranger is a very mobile architypes too, while the Tank could be least mobile architype). So the ranger would continue to deal High and sustained damage while the tank continiously tries to close the gap to make meaningful damage with their abilities. And all architypes have a cc cleanse card so even if the tanks manage to get a cc on the ranger it could be removed immediately.
Fighter-Ranger: I think this one too is very easy, you could say the fighter was specifically made with the ranger in mind. The fighter specialises in closing the gap and no matter what the ranger tries to do, in a 1v1 the fighter will almost always be up close and because of the huge burst damage they give each session it's only a matter of time before the ranger loses... I haven't even mentioned that the fighter can be that way even at range, so the ranger doesn't have a safe distance to work with. It may be worth nothing that the ranger is also the most fragile architype (though that is not to say they'll just be shredded like paper).
Summoner-Fighter: In this encounter, the fighter is in a 2v1 battle at the very least. The fighter is taking on a player and 1- 3 NPCs(controlled by the player), so it's hard to see how the fighter would win this fight because, yes, there's the fact where the fighter could try and focus on the player since all they need to do is kill the player to win, but the damage and CC the summons are dishing out is not ignorable (in terms of just damage output and CC the fighter might as well be fighting against 2- 4 players). So the huge advantage here goes to the summoner.
Bard-Summoner: The bard has the ability to flip the switch on the summoner, turning their summons against them, coupled with a series of debuff on the summoner and buffs on the bard the burst damage within those few seconds of betrayal could prove fatal to the summoner (a burst damage that could potentially put a fighter to shame) and regrouping after such an event could be hard because by that time the bard is already onto the player. Now the summoner could keep one or two summons out of the range of the bards ability it still won't help if the bard has a friend whose life they don't need to care for and the summoner has an enemy they have to care for. Oh, The summoner might as well have all their summons range, the bard armed with buffs can mitigate their damage and focus their attention on a debuffed player and dealing extra damage.
Tank-Rogue: The element of surprise and positional play, these are crucial gameplay for rogues giving them lots of crit damage but they can't easily be done in a 1v1 situation, stealth does not equal invincible, so Tanks just need to do what they do best; take damage, CC, and deal damage.... While the rogue may not get it's ace often in a 1v1 they would still eventually get some chances, but the tank can take those damage, as long as they have the chance to hit the rogue (The rouge may be very mobile and keep some distance but note that that just makes the playing field more even, regarding damage output, cause the rogue does not have ranged adv over tanks but then when it comes to constitution, the tank can play among all day).
Cleric-Mage: this is where my logic to their position is just based on what's left. So with this case both can dish out damage at range or close with CC and other effects on their opponents, but the cleric can heal themselves much more than the mage and could therefore out last the mage in a fight.
Mage-Bard: In this encounter the mage has the Upper-hand at range and could keep it that way with some of their elemental effects, but they also deal huge damage with abilities both at range or close up so even though the bard would need to fight up close it only reduces their disadvantage a little, also the mage can refill their mana meaning more damage for them, even with the little healing the bard has, it would not find it's situation any better
Rougue-Cleric: The cleric does not have the constitution of a rogue to take huge crit damage from the occasional stealth and positional adv, but can heal part of it, their only hope to matching the rogue's High crit damage would be to have more of their healing abilities than their damage abilities which would render them open to some of the rogue's ranged abilities without much extra damage to help especially if the rogue they're facing is using a ranged weapon. (But the cleric can also use a ranged weapon... Oh, the rogue can mitigate that using stealth, making it hard for the cleric to hit target especially if the cleric uses tap-targeting), which brings me to the evasive nature of the rogue, they can dodge the AoE attacks of the cleric and even use stealth to evade the tap-targeting abilities leaving the cleric with little time to respond to the rogue with abilities, mainly focusing on their weapons which if ranged would still be a hassle.
I'd like to see what you think about it. And what you think the dynamic is more likely to look like.
I am curious as to why you think the rock paper scissors would be linear and only based off the primary archtype
Rock (anti burst, burst mitigation, burst healing, high hp): Tanks
Paper (attrition, continuous damage, buffing and continuous healing): Summoners
Scissors (burst damage, high uptime): Rangers, Mages, Rogues
Generalist: Bard (leans paper), Fighter (leans rock)
Sand paper (some rock and some paper): Cleric
Reliance on going first:
1. Rogue
2. Ranger
3. Mage
4. Summoner
5. Fighter
6. Tank
7. Bard
8. Cleric
That's an interesting way of putting it, so how do you propose the generalist and the sand paper would relate with the others and between themselves
A generalist can be versatile and depends heavily on specialization, can play aggressively, defensively, disruptively, flexibly, hybrid, and midrange-y
Sand paper is focused on surviving and outlasting, this also depends more heavily on specialization, could be anti-aggressive and or sustained
Comments
That would be augment-dependent.
A High Priest might not have much Attrition at all, but a Templar might at least have enough to wear down a Rogue or even Ranger (Mages would have it easier since they might still be able to absorb mana from a Cleric, weakening their 'Rock' status).
I am curious as to why you think the rock paper scissors would be linear and only based off the primary archtype
yes
No Confidence ! D-:
A generalist can be versatile and depends heavily on specialization, can play aggressively, defensively, disruptively, flexibly, hybrid, and midrange-y
Sand paper is focused on surviving and outlasting, this also depends more heavily on specialization, could be anti-aggressive and or sustained