Steven's response to secondary archetypes
Morgalf
Member
I know this has been discussed before, but we have some new info. Steven's answer to the secondary archetypes gave us a better idea of where they may go with secondary archetypes. I was curious what people thought about his answer and what they want to see.
He responded there are various ideas in the table. Secondary archetypes may effect damage values, cooldowns, mana cost, range of abilities, ect. Furthermore, they may effect the visual graphics of spells.
In my opinion, you can't go wrong with changing visual effects. This would only increase the unique customization of the character. However, damage values, cooldowns, and otherwise makes me fear the inevitability of a meta class. I would hate to see every single PvP player running tank or cleric secondary because of their common PvP benefits. That limits builds and "forces" us to commit to a build we don't enjoy to be the most effective.
He responded there are various ideas in the table. Secondary archetypes may effect damage values, cooldowns, mana cost, range of abilities, ect. Furthermore, they may effect the visual graphics of spells.
In my opinion, you can't go wrong with changing visual effects. This would only increase the unique customization of the character. However, damage values, cooldowns, and otherwise makes me fear the inevitability of a meta class. I would hate to see every single PvP player running tank or cleric secondary because of their common PvP benefits. That limits builds and "forces" us to commit to a build we don't enjoy to be the most effective.
"The gods do not fear death. They greet death as an old friend. When your time comes to return to the ashes, move forward knowing death is merely one of many paths to a new adventure."
1
Comments
One point in his discussion was the options for the primary archetypes. To me, this is where folks wanting the feel of a different class should focus attention. I think in the base Fighter archetype is where you could start the separation to those fighter class branches. The resulting class may be a combination of options selected for primary archetype, armor, weapon(s), or skills. If they are smart they enable this as a path for the player to create the class they want. Then, when the secondaries come in the signature abilities arrive. Meaning the augments are based on the combination of primary and secondary archetypes. And how many swap outs really depends on those combinations. For some, the secondary augment may just be to pick up what that archetype has at its core. For other combos, we could be looking at completely new abilities.
but there could be people who enjoy those builds, so they get to play a powerful build and enjoy it.
also, I think they will give us lots of elemental options for the secondary archetypes aimed at changing our main elemental attribute, so if you spec full for PVP, then you might be lacking in pve or it could be that speccing for PVP is about picking and changing attributes to hit people who don't resist your damage.
Visuals for me are just fluff, pretty and all, but don't add much to the game mechanically or introduce new playstyles. Don't get me wrong, a lot of successful MMOs started with around 8 base classes, but AoC "64 classes" just sounds like a marketing trick atm. This WILL come back to bite them in reviews and player impressions. This is why I'm glad these issues are being brought up early. This issue is being discussed across multiple topics right, now, so I just might copy/paste what I wrote elsewhere:
I still suspect that augments alone are likely to make the extended class feel rather shallow, due to their passive nature, even if we get a lot of freedom in customising our kit. I assume Intrepid don't have the time or will do deal with creation of fully-fledged 64 classes with their own unique set of active abilities. Which is fair, as that would be quite an undertaking.
At very least they should consider making a pool of "basic" active abilities from the secondary archetypes which you can learn as part of your extended class on the top of augments. Think Templar (cleric primary) or Battle Mage (mage primary) getting access to Charge/Blitz or Crippling Blow from their secondary fighter archetype. That would be less work intensive as those skills have to created, tested and balanced anyway. Restricting access only to some "basics" could help with balance. That would help out with the gameplay variety and fleshing out class roles.
In a perfect world we would get 64 classes with fairly unique playstyles and their own skill trees, even if some obvious overlaps in class roles would happen, but we don't live in a perfect world. The devs are limited by time, money and their own ability to come up with a creative and balanced class system.
Credit to Azherae for getting the exact quote from Steven
Azherae wrote: »
And Steven's response, verbatim:
"Yeah, it's a bit of a spectrum there, right? Because some of the ideas we have with regards to Augmentation is that they could be, kind of, very rudimentary mechanics that get adjusted, such as like, damage values, cooldowns, mana costs, distance and range, some targeting changes, but they could also be very fundamental changes which would include visuals and audio and flavor, for a particular ability, and we've given some examples in the past about augments, we're not quite at the augment stage yet, right? We're still fleshing out the remainder of the classes, being Rogue and Summoner, that are remaining for Alpha-2, we've talked about that earlier when we laid out the roadmap for the A2 testing, and once we get into kind of playing around with these augments we're going to be taking a lot of feedback from the community but the idea is that some of these augments will radically and fundamentally change an ability and that could include all of those things listed."
I'll reiterate what I said in the Consternation thread, Overall I think this is possitive news and I see it fufilling some of my hopes and laying asside some of my fears. In the past we had heard about the Grand technical flexibility of augmentation at a code level to 'do' almost anything. But this was never expressed as a commitment to use that capacity and particularly not a willingness to 'stack' all the things the system could do into one augment to create "fundemental changes,..., for a particular ability".
What's most encouraging is that he's opening the door to the possibility that not all augmentation will be equally deep, some maybe most will be shallower "very rudimentary" and others much more transformative. That really sounds like it precludes some kind of universal '+2% crit' augment that can get slapped onto every skill and that generated the most fear of a bland system. An augment which dose "fundemental changes" to an ability could not possibly be universally applied like that. And the words "for a particular ability" is I think near definitive proof of my claim that augments will be designed to modify only one active skill and their is no picking what skill it is applied too as so many still belive. Basically that augments work just like the circular nodes of the base archetype skill trees.
This has a possitive spin off, a lot of Augmentation ground work will already have been laid, not just in the technical side as we were told in the Warrior showcase. But that in the design of the base archetype skill trees their would have been lots of 'cutting room floor' scraps that was thought up, maybe implemented but never used. That's gonna be prime material for future augments. Both on an individual augment basis but also for schools/groups and general themes for how a class 'kit' could work. Because the only real reason to make few "fundamental" changes is to make a shift in a class kit, enough to make it play differently.
I think the class fantasy concept development is even more likely to be useful to them now.
By design, Augments are not just limited to that.
That would not be a perfect world.
64 true Classes (the D&D definition) would be too difficult for the devs to balance - even in the best world.
1. They are shooting for unbalanced builds that shine in areas and have holes in other areas. This will make people play together and make teams that shore up the holes.
2. This is a paper rock scissor combat system. If you are metta at something. It means your a really top end rock let's say. Meaning your counter is out there and you will be spanked. Look out for that paper, your end is near.
How is 15-20 properpy fleshed out, solid and unique classes, with matching animations and ability schemes, as well as non combat functions and boons, with each class specializing in 2 to 4 weapons (let's take the extremes, mage 2 and fighter 4 weapons) "less options"?
They are true options with lots to choose from.
You think this so called customization of the 64 classes and unrestricted weapon/skill usage will offer you true freedom of choice?
You wont have a choice when the majority of the classes like cleric/rogue and ranger/tank and fighter/summoner lose to those that make sense.
You wont have choice when you realise that yes you can slot any weapon you want but they wont matter. There is no plan in this design. Only a vision in potential.
Not to mention that the animations will be lack luster to make it so that all weapon usage barely fits with the abilities, making most of them looking unsatisfying.
There are many sure things about Ashes of Creation that we can take Steven's word on, nanfoodle.
Unfortunately, combat balance is one of the few topics we'll have to take a wait and see approach.
Remember the Combat Team is tasked with balancing a game with 8 archetypes, 8 secondaries, weapon skills, gear, religious affiliations, and so on ... and across many different content types (sieges, instanced raids, ocean combat, caravans, overland PvPvE, etc.)
I support the rock, paper, scissors combat design in Ashes. It's one of the reasons I'm here. But, it's not as easy as a simple re-quote from the devs.
Yes, Please.
I really do plan to play one of my Characters - probably my Main - as a Necromancer.
Yes Please. Give me the greenish, or purple'ish, or ghostly blue'ish glowy Magic which a Necromancer should be able to have.
Yes. Please give me my Boney Servants, or Zombies - or whatever else is on the Table as a Summoner, which is different from a probably more Nature/Life-Loving Summoner.
I think i don't even ask for something difficult like something completely new. Just for basic Stuff that other VideoGames also got done many many Years ago.
✓ Occasional Roleplayer
✓ Kinda starting to look for a Guild right now. (German)
Which is why encounters are balanced for an 8-person Group with one of each Primary Archetype.
But it is easier to balance. Rock play style has to much of an advantage boost paper or new paper options. Of course you can make you rock build and augment with religion and other options to balance your class a little to make you almost balance between rock, paper and scissors but then you will not have a character that can shine is one area.
Sure like any game, there will be meta but gamers can change their deck to counter that build. I'm sure IS will need practical experience at balancing this but it's much more manageable.
Really comes down to how creative IS staff can be.
We know some of the differences for Necromancer and Shaman.
We don't know the "class fantasy" differences for Templar and Highsword - but Steven and the devs do.
So a "meta" of tank-clerics as an example is easily broken by primary Mages or primary Summoners which are strong archetypes against bruiser Archetypes (Tank & Fighter). So other classes facing a "meta" build can just look at the counters of that, build that and break those builds.
Sometimes with enough player skill adjusting the secondary archetype or adjusting the talents on skills or weapon mastery may suffice to break a meta build,
sometimes restricting the resources to get the gear for that build can be enough because it requires a specific set to work
and in very extreme cases it might result in people switching their main character to counter the meta builds.
My point is: There are a lot of systems planned & implemented that were made with the intent to allow for fast (but not free) build adjustments, which will IMO be used to break meta builds before they emerge.
But yeah there will be a meta. Always is
So a cleric/rogue could be 60 cleric/4 rogue, or 32cleric/32rogue.
Yes. One Shadow Disciple could only apply Rogue Augments on one Active Skill while a different Shadow Disciple applies Rogue Augments on 15+ Active Skills.
Will be in testing how secondary class will change how skills work and what skills can be changed to do something different. How rogue can a Cleric become? Because you will still base class a Cleric but can that class get full stealth like a Rogue? Can't wait for the augment update. Summer of 2025 can't come soon enough.
Which is why the term Primary Archetype is used. Primarily a Cleric.
A Cleric/Rogue cannot replace the need for a Primary Archetype Rogue in an 8-person Group.
Even if a Shadow Disciple could get full Stealth from an Augment, it wouldn't last as long as the Active Skill.
https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/60692/proposal-for-class-mini-dev-series-on-8-points#latest
I invite those intrerested in your future AoC characters, which is obvious since you started your own threads on a topic that for years didnt get a serious attention from the community, to join this proposal.
True a Cleric can never be a replacement for a base class rogue. Much like a Rogure \ Cleric could never play group healer. But secondary archetypes can also change a skill to something else. Steven said as much. I could see Cleric \ Rogure even getting stealth of some type. Maybe even some damage improvements. And a Rogue \ Cleric could also do some backup heals in some way. And to his point a Cleric \ Rogue could spec deep enough that their heal spells could suffer being a main healer but could be a fun class to run with some rangers and rogues in some stealth missions.
(Keep in mind that Secondary Archetypes do not provide brand new Active Skills - I think "change into something else" is paraphrase that could be a bit misleading depending on what, exactly, that is intended to mean.)
I think I said all that...
meta in games like dota , LOL , valorant , overwatch , these type of games is fine , but meta in a game where you spend months investing in a class then literally go to sleep , wake up , read the patch notes , find out that ur class nerfed and other class outshines u and u are not needed in competitive pvp because u are replaced by other more needed roles , that is just horrible experience , it leads to two outcomes , people taking break quitting , or ppl grinding new class , both outcomes happen , in game design if u are not able to balance 64 classes then literally don't do it , u are just wasting resources
Meta could mean all classes are good (or bad) or what ever. This is why there is always a "meta". And unless everything will be the same, some classes / combo will be better for certain fights. If my class does not have any AOE damage then any AOE fight i am less optimal.
Which is why there are so many adjustment systems planned, so we as player can adapt without having to wait for a patch.
That being said, I think (and this is me SPECULATING) it is worth considering that we might have to consider secondary archetypes as a temporary decision for ourselves. Much like gear, if the environment changes (e.g. a certain archetype being played a lot on a certain server/ in a specific region; a certain type of resource being unavailable or available in abundance; a certain type of mob spreading) what is "best in slot" might change in regards to classes.
We don't know if certain world events doesn't include temporarily buffing a certain type of ability. For example having a special relic in your divine Node could increase holy damage or increase the overall healing received in that Node's ZOI (Zone of Influence) which would empower orimary and secondary cleric archetypes in the first case or buff healers but make classes that can reduce healing more important - thats something we just do not know yet but could provide ingame incentives to change your secondary Archetype from time to time based on ingame changes without external influence.
You have a lot options to choose from. For example instead Tank secondary, you may go for Plate armor. Or shield as weapon, and put points on active blocking skills. Race may affect this as well. And also there are augments from the religion. With so many variables to choose from, There will be for sure Youtube videos about a "meta". BUT if this is the optimal build is another question.
Not to mention the optimal build for small scale PVP is different from Large scale PVP is different from Dungeons/Raids and ect. And when the game is PVX you cant just take X build for raid, since you may encounter PVP