grisu wrote: » Did I miss some change of philosophy on intrepid part? Gear and specs will be easily changeable? Since when? Last I heard is that changing 2ndary classes will require quite a process. They don't want people to have tons of armorsets cluttering their inventories and do a one fit all situation. Gear itself comes mostly from crafting which is supposedly a deep and intricate process. Assuming you can just buy a complet revamped set for different stats is quite a bold statement for casual players that don't go out of their way to hoard money/ materials. Last I heard is that they want every decision to have lasting effects on every scale, from personal to server wide.
Caeryl wrote: » No, that does not mean people will not have two or three gearsets to swap between as needed. At the very least you would want a set for general solo play and another for any group play.
grisu wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » No, that does not mean people will not have two or three gearsets to swap between as needed. At the very least you would want a set for general solo play and another for any group play. That is contrary to what Intrepid has stated in the past multiple times as I have pointed out with 2 separate approaches. If you just deny that without providing new statements from them that this philosophy has changed than you have no ground to stand on.
Caeryl wrote: » (...) it is sensible to expected to have to use multiple setups at various points of the gameplay experience, As I said in another thread, if one gear setup will address every part of the game, then something has not been designed well. Either the gear setup is overpowered, or the game’s content is not demanding enough. at the very least, you would be changing out enchantments on the gear itself depending on your needs.
Horizontal enchantments are more situational. For example: I'd like my sword to do force damage instead of holy damage because the monsters I tend to fight are incorporeal.[49] This doesn't make the item more powerful, but instead more applicable to different situations, and less so to others. This type of enchanting assumes no risk, just time and effort.
grisu wrote: » They did say that you can enchant horizontally to make your sword attack do more magical damage if you feel yourself fight a lot of things more suspectible to it, but gear itself isn't switched out.
grisu wrote: » That feels like a logical conclusion, but it nevertheless is against what IS has stated that one gear set will be your gear for all activities whether it's pve/pvp/ large small scale. It wasn't so much about it being strong, but it reflecting your play style in all circumstances. So there wouldn't be a stat like "resilliance" that specifically reduces damage from other players. It's all still a little vague and conceptional. I am trying to find the exact quote, but I have yet to dig it up.
grisu wrote: » https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8SpiG0Ulbg&feature=youtu.be&t=14m5s Edit: Retrying it in here instead of youtube it seems like it won't start. so 14:05 if you want to check it out. I'm pretty sure that was the exchange I had in mind for this topic. I really just can't remember any more, too much information floating around in too many livestream qna that really isn't organized yet despite of having the wiki.
grisu wrote: » Well I don't know what else to show you then to show you they literally said they don't want people to have to have multiple sets. We'll just have to wait and see. I'm pretty sure there was another exchange homing that in even more but I don't know where to look for it. My question is answered, they didn't change their philosophy so take from it what you will.
Crafting in Ashes of Creation is recipe based, not RNG based.[8][9] Within a crafting recipe, there are dials (based on artisan specialization) that are used customize crafted items, such as:[10] Increasing one stat at the expense of another.[11] Making an item more magical versus more physical.[11] I think Star Wars Galaxies had a great crafting system... The resource gathering and the crafting system altogether as a whole really was I think way beyond its time. That's kind of the direction we want to go, where there's choices to be made in the crafting system and those choices change what you end up with... It's not just about doing X recipe to get Y item. You know, there's actually thought involved in it and there is you know a market to be captured based on those decisions.[12] – Jeffrey Bard
Caeryl wrote: » BlackBrony wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » BlackBrony wrote: » There won't be a playstyle. There will be main class - sub class FOTM and that's it. Nothing else. If you think IS intends to do nothing about balance then why did you even bother investing in the game’s future? Considering the amount of people asking for a DPS meters, I don't see any other way. It will happen, and the rest of the player base will follow. Cookie cutter builds will be there, and eventually it will permeate to the rest of the player base, and we all be running the same things if we are interested in doing some content. No that’s not even remotely what that means, unless you believe IS to be entirely incapable of developing varied content. Any guide you look at has caveats such as “built assuming raid support” or “can sub out this gear for that gear or that other gear for more sustain/defenses/etc” or “specifically for this boss” or “option A for more AoE, option B for higher single target”. Your issue apparently comes from your unique for-fun builds not being the most efficient. If it can clear content, you won’t be lacking for other more casual players to group with. Don’t blame your own personal issues and preferences on the players dedicated to making the most of the game.
BlackBrony wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » BlackBrony wrote: » There won't be a playstyle. There will be main class - sub class FOTM and that's it. Nothing else. If you think IS intends to do nothing about balance then why did you even bother investing in the game’s future? Considering the amount of people asking for a DPS meters, I don't see any other way. It will happen, and the rest of the player base will follow. Cookie cutter builds will be there, and eventually it will permeate to the rest of the player base, and we all be running the same things if we are interested in doing some content.
Caeryl wrote: » BlackBrony wrote: » There won't be a playstyle. There will be main class - sub class FOTM and that's it. Nothing else. If you think IS intends to do nothing about balance then why did you even bother investing in the game’s future?
BlackBrony wrote: » There won't be a playstyle. There will be main class - sub class FOTM and that's it. Nothing else.
mrsynth wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » BlackBrony wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » BlackBrony wrote: » There won't be a playstyle. There will be main class - sub class FOTM and that's it. Nothing else. If you think IS intends to do nothing about balance then why did you even bother investing in the game’s future? Considering the amount of people asking for a DPS meters, I don't see any other way. It will happen, and the rest of the player base will follow. Cookie cutter builds will be there, and eventually it will permeate to the rest of the player base, and we all be running the same things if we are interested in doing some content. No that’s not even remotely what that means, unless you believe IS to be entirely incapable of developing varied content. Any guide you look at has caveats such as “built assuming raid support” or “can sub out this gear for that gear or that other gear for more sustain/defenses/etc” or “specifically for this boss” or “option A for more AoE, option B for higher single target”. Your issue apparently comes from your unique for-fun builds not being the most efficient. If it can clear content, you won’t be lacking for other more casual players to group with. Don’t blame your own personal issues and preferences on the players dedicated to making the most of the game. They've said that they will balance classes for group content and that every class will have a way to complete solo content, but that doesn't mean classes will be balanced for 1v1 situations which they have also said that they won't be. I don't remember exactly what they said about metas - something about flavor of the month is going around in my head.
Ikcen wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » mrsynth wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » BlackBrony wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » BlackBrony wrote: » There won't be a playstyle. There will be main class - sub class FOTM and that's it. Nothing else. If you think IS intends to do nothing about balance then why did you even bother investing in the game’s future? Considering the amount of people asking for a DPS meters, I don't see any other way. It will happen, and the rest of the player base will follow. Cookie cutter builds will be there, and eventually it will permeate to the rest of the player base, and we all be running the same things if we are interested in doing some content. No that’s not even remotely what that means, unless you believe IS to be entirely incapable of developing varied content. Any guide you look at has caveats such as “built assuming raid support” or “can sub out this gear for that gear or that other gear for more sustain/defenses/etc” or “specifically for this boss” or “option A for more AoE, option B for higher single target”. Your issue apparently comes from your unique for-fun builds not being the most efficient. If it can clear content, you won’t be lacking for other more casual players to group with. Don’t blame your own personal issues and preferences on the players dedicated to making the most of the game. They've said that they will balance classes for group content and that every class will have a way to complete solo content, but that doesn't mean classes will be balanced for 1v1 situations which they have also said that they won't be. I don't remember exactly what they said about metas - something about flavor of the month is going around in my head. Classes shouldn’t be balanced for 1v1s, that’s how you get stale combat. But IS plan on having carousel balancing, adjustments from patch to patch so nothing is best in every situation for an extensive length of time. Their biggest balancing challenges are going to come from single-roll groups, and how they decide to address buff/healing/debuff/DoT stacking. None of this has any impact on your idea of “cookie cutter” builds based on generally good stats. There will be room for unique builds if you put in the effort and data crunching to make them work, but people who actually put in a lot of research and number crunching into developing accessible effective builds deserve praise whether they share those builds or not. Because at the end of the day, you can call a build “cookie cutter” or “unique” or “cheese” or “niche”, but everyone who made them put in the effort and research to make them work, and that deserves praise whether 5 people run their build or 500. In fact classes should be balanced for 1 vs 1. This is the most important balance. Also they should be balanced for party vs party, and for zerg vs zerg. But 1 vs 1 is above all. As if you have a good balance in 1 vs 1 then it is easier to reach the other balances. And there are different kinds of balance. For example you can balance the classes at the stone - paper way. It is easier than full par, and also makes more sense.
Caeryl wrote: » mrsynth wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » BlackBrony wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » BlackBrony wrote: » There won't be a playstyle. There will be main class - sub class FOTM and that's it. Nothing else. If you think IS intends to do nothing about balance then why did you even bother investing in the game’s future? Considering the amount of people asking for a DPS meters, I don't see any other way. It will happen, and the rest of the player base will follow. Cookie cutter builds will be there, and eventually it will permeate to the rest of the player base, and we all be running the same things if we are interested in doing some content. No that’s not even remotely what that means, unless you believe IS to be entirely incapable of developing varied content. Any guide you look at has caveats such as “built assuming raid support” or “can sub out this gear for that gear or that other gear for more sustain/defenses/etc” or “specifically for this boss” or “option A for more AoE, option B for higher single target”. Your issue apparently comes from your unique for-fun builds not being the most efficient. If it can clear content, you won’t be lacking for other more casual players to group with. Don’t blame your own personal issues and preferences on the players dedicated to making the most of the game. They've said that they will balance classes for group content and that every class will have a way to complete solo content, but that doesn't mean classes will be balanced for 1v1 situations which they have also said that they won't be. I don't remember exactly what they said about metas - something about flavor of the month is going around in my head. Classes shouldn’t be balanced for 1v1s, that’s how you get stale combat. But IS plan on having carousel balancing, adjustments from patch to patch so nothing is best in every situation for an extensive length of time. Their biggest balancing challenges are going to come from single-roll groups, and how they decide to address buff/healing/debuff/DoT stacking. None of this has any impact on your idea of “cookie cutter” builds based on generally good stats. There will be room for unique builds if you put in the effort and data crunching to make them work, but people who actually put in a lot of research and number crunching into developing accessible effective builds deserve praise whether they share those builds or not. Because at the end of the day, you can call a build “cookie cutter” or “unique” or “cheese” or “niche”, but everyone who made them put in the effort and research to make them work, and that deserves praise whether 5 people run their build or 500.
Ikcen wrote: » In fact classes should be balanced for 1 vs 1.
Ikcen wrote: » Also you can add some damage and speed modifiers to balance the zerg, like penalties for the large parties. So the 100 vs 20 to be a playable situation. Well the 20 will lose almost certainly, but there will be a PvP.
