Spif wrote: » Please don't load Bucky down with too many classes In P1, the mage felt pretty good. There is interaction between skills/combos and the debuffs, decent CC, good damage identity. It needs a few hard choices in the skill tree mostly, so you can only get deep into 2 of the 3 elements. Also a reactive/instant defensive CC (frost armor style or bladeturn maybe). Blink has too much good stuff associated with it, and that should be split out. It's not good having to burn a CC break AND insta-cast to use a mobility skill. Ranger needs some work, and I don't play tank, so I don't know.
Chicago wrote: » After testing the rogue I strongly feel that whoever designed the bard and the rogue should design all the classes
Spif wrote: » Please don't load Bucky down with too many classes
Kaytos wrote: » totally agree except the Bard and what we see of the rogue the other classes are not great to play and I'm not even talking about the Tank which is a disaster. hard to understand so much difficulty for such basic classes.
SmileGurney wrote: » Kaytos wrote: » totally agree except the Bard and what we see of the rogue the other classes are not great to play and I'm not even talking about the Tank which is a disaster. hard to understand so much difficulty for such basic classes. Other classes aren't that great to play, because they are too one dimensional, there is also no build variety or playstyle options you could switch between. Some of that stuff "might" come with the secondary archetypes, but its a big "if" and approx. 25 levels too late.
willsummon wrote: » SmileGurney wrote: » Kaytos wrote: » totally agree except the Bard and what we see of the rogue the other classes are not great to play and I'm not even talking about the Tank which is a disaster. hard to understand so much difficulty for such basic classes. Other classes aren't that great to play, because they are too one dimensional, there is also no build variety or playstyle options you could switch between. Some of that stuff "might" come with the secondary archetypes, but its a big "if" and approx. 25 levels too late. The "one dimensional" issue for some archetypes is because not all the weapon options have been organized. Not getting into classes. Though, for example the Fighter is planned to have a choice between two-hand weapon and dual wielding. With different play styles for both. The Tanks is planned to have a choice between sword and board, and two-hand weapon.
Imnotkio wrote: » The class design is definitely good, but I think Ashes design in general has a mobility issue and these classes just highlight it. We need a nerf to universal dodge jump mechanics. Having a cooldown between dodges, nerfing the momentum and the distance traveled. I'd like to see Bard flourish be limited by one reset per cooldown time too. I haven't tested the rogue but I'm willing to guess the mobility on the class is too over the top too. While I think earlier classes (mage, ranger, tank, cleric) could use a rework in a lot of aspects, I believe the amount of mobility in those classes should be the standard for the game rather than everybody zooming around. Melee classes are the only exception because they need to close the gap and then back out alive, but it shouldn't be over the top either.
willsummon wrote: » Putting in those limits would have large affects on later class combinations. The archetypes on not end game. It is the classes that will be end game.
Imnotkio wrote: » willsummon wrote: » Putting in those limits would have large affects on later class combinations. The archetypes on not end game. It is the classes that will be end game. Yeah, and you think what? the classes are going to be less mobile? It's only going to get worse from here. By the time we all have augments, this will be a fucking DBZ fight. Excessive mobility is not a good thing.