Number of Classes in AoC

Initially, IS was planning to have 12 base archetypes in the game. This would result in a whopping 144 classes. Obviously, this was an almost impossible task to take on and hence they removed 4 of those archetypes, leaving us with 64 classes.

I feel that 8 is still too many FOR LAUNCH. I feel like the ideal amount of base archetypes should just be 6 for launch: Tank, Cleric, Mage, Fighter, Rogue and Ranger.

The reason I say this is because designing and balancing abilities is something that you improve at with experience. Having 64 classes to do this for, is simply too much. If you only have 36 however, it gives you a lot more room to better design and balance these classes. This will result in the newer classes being much more better designed and balanced from the get go, as IS will have more knowledge and experience doing this.

That's why, I feel like there should only be 36 classes for launch. Every 6 months, they could add a new archetype. So we'll get bard and summoner a year after launch. After releasing bard and summoner, they could create polls to ask the community what class they want next.

What do you guys think?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Cold 0ne FTB

I personally wouldn't mind but if they can do it go for it and I think they would lose a lot of people if they did it.

CaptnChuck

Cold 0ne FTB wrote: »

I personally wouldn't mind but if they can do it go for it and I think they would lose a lot of people if they did it.

I doubt it. Even if they removed fighter, which is the class that I want to play, I would pick rogue primary and tank secondary to create a pseudo fighter class. Or I would mess around with my tank gear to give more dmg or something like that. I'd assume that most people would be like me as well. Summoners and Bards aren't that common for most games at launch. The 6 classes that I mentioned above however, are the standard 6 for most MMOs.

Songcaller

Fuck that. I will main Bard and I do not agree Bard should be removed. Thankfully, we have Jeff Bard who worked on Everquest and Jeff understands the use of Bards.

ShroudedFox

I feel like after a few incidents that have happened like apocalypse (people misunderstanding that it was a testing environment for action combat and not a seperate game) and missing some of the milestones by dates they stated earlier on in development (before Steven knew as much as he does now about game development), which had a rather large community response has made Steven reluctant to regress any of the promises that have been made, or provide deadlines for things unless he is 100% sure he can deliver on them.

like personally i would be fine with a smaller roster of classes with promises of future classes so they can really but the potential backlash if he retracts those classes could be massive.

Interest in ashes has reached an all time high from what I can tell simply by looking at youtube amount of views on ashes content. changing promises that were made earlier in development would hurt the integrity of IS and I would rather them look as strong as possible atm.

Cold 0ne FTB

Neurath wrote: »

Fuck that. I will main Bard and I do not agree Bard should be removed. Thankfully, we have Jeff Bard who worked on Everquest and Jeff understands the use of Bards.

This is the point. Which two classes do you cut. It's probably whatever two classes they have done the least with but that doesn't change that it will upset people.

CaptnChuck wrote: »

Cold 0ne FTB wrote: »

I personally wouldn't mind but if they can do it go for it and I think they would lose a lot of people if they did it.

I doubt it. Even if they removed fighter, which is the class that I want to play, I would pick rogue primary and tank secondary to create a pseudo fighter class. Or I would mess around with my tank gear to give more dmg or something like that. I'd assume that most people would be like me as well. Summoners and Bards aren't that common for most games at launch. The 6 classes that I mentioned above however, are the standard 6 for most MMOs.

I could see them make pseudo variants to fill in the holes but I am not sure that would be enough.

Aeri

A lot of the difficulty from balancing the classes will come from how exactly the secondary classes/augments affect things. It is entirely possible that balancing the 8 classes within a given archetype will be fairly straightforward and easy. If so, then rather than trying to balance 64 classes, it'd be more of they just need to balance the 8 archetypes however they want, and then do the extra work to make the secondary effects reasonably balanced within that archetype.

Just as an example, building off something Steven used recently. Say Fighters get a Charge ability. We'll assume Fighter/Fighter (Weapon Master) is the base version of the ability. You don't have to balance that ability directly towards 63 other classes, only 7:

Weapon Master: Charges at the enemy and deals X damage.
Tellsword: Charges at the enemy and deals Y damage. Grants the Tellsword a Z% damage buff.
Templar: Charges at the enemy and deals Y damage. Heals the Templar for Z damage.
Battle Mage: Teleports to the enemy and deals Y damage.
Strider: Charges at the enemy and deals Y damage. Roots the target in place for Z time.
Duelist: Charges at the enemy and deals Y damage. Grants the Duelist a Z% evasion buff.
Wild Blade: Charges at the enemy and deals Y damage. Summons a short-duration minion to attack the target.
Knight: Charges at the enemy and deals Y damage. Grants the Knight a Z% defense buff. (Alternatively, Stuns the target for Z time if the Knight is wielding a shield)

The individual changes that the augments from a secondary class give don't have to give such huge differences that it throws the general archetype balance way out of wack.

Cold 0ne FTB

Aeri wrote: »

A lot of the difficulty from balancing the classes will come from how exactly the secondary classes/augments affect things. It is entirely possible that balancing the 8 classes within a given archetype will be fairly straightforward and easy. If so, then rather than trying to balance 64 classes, it'd be more of they just need to balance the 8 archetypes however they want, and then do the extra work to make the secondary effects reasonably balanced within that archetype.

Just as an example, building off something Steven used recently. Say Fighters get a Charge ability. We'll assume Fighter/Fighter (Weapon Master) is the base version of the ability. You don't have to balance that ability directly towards 63 other classes, only 7:

Weapon Master: Charges at the enemy and deals X damage.
Tellsword: Charges at the enemy and deals Y damage. Grants the Tellsword a Z% damage buff.
Templar: Charges at the enemy and deals Y damage. Heals the Templar for Z damage.
Battle Mage: Teleports to the enemy and deals Y damage.
Strider: Charges at the enemy and deals Y damage. Roots the target in place for Z time.
Duelist: Charges at the enemy and deals Y damage. Grants the Duelist a Z% evasion buff.
Wild Blade: Charges at the enemy and deals Y damage. Summons a short-duration minion to attack the target.
Knight: Charges at the enemy and deals Y damage. Grants the Knight a Z% defense buff. (Alternatively, Stuns the target for Z time if the Knight is wielding a shield)

The individual changes that the augments from a secondary class give don't have to give such huge differences that it throws the general archetype balance way out of wack.

The other thing they could do is treat each archtype as a whole class. Balance it as if their are only 8 classes. There might be a lot of abilities in the class but it makes it alot easier.

Vio1

Limiting Classes will not help with content being created. You’ll end up with people upset at the lack of diverse character selections previously stated.

Not to mention that, for many MMOs, the first month of release is crucial to the longevity of the game. You want to put your best foot forward and not half-ass in content and make future promises. People may not stick around to wait for bard and summoner after seeing the remaining content of the game. They’ll question why developers couldn’t wait an extra 6 months for the “true” game.

You’ll lose players, which erodes community, which strains the PvP and interdependency the game strives for, and then the neatly woven MMO unravels into a tangled ball of garbage, unlikely to ever recover.

The real question is why can’t you wait? If you’re saying it’s possible to add them later then why not add them now? If you’re implying it isn’t possible to have them now, arbitrarily picking two classes to remove instead, then why bother considering adding them later as a tacked on gimmick?

In the end I believe it is best to let the development team craft their boat. If it sinks, it sinks. If it floats, it floats. But I’m not going to ask them to skip building the sails of the ship just because I want to float on the water already, or pretend I’m doing them a favor by capitulating design.

Aeri

Cold 0ne FTB wrote: »

The other thing they could do is treat each archtype as a whole class. Balance it as if their are only 8 classes. There might be a lot of abilities in the class but it makes it alot easier.

That is essentially the same thing, yes. You balance all of the archetypes against one another. Then the subclasses are balanced against their given archetype. Like this, theoretically, any subclass should be balanced correctly against any archetype.

Judeth

But my Keeper..

It's not necessarily 64 separate classes that they are working on. More like 8 classes with different benefits depending on what secondary you choose. I think it would be a different story if all 64 classes had their own individual abilities.

CaptnChuck

@ShroudedFox

I understand but I doubt cutting down a few classes is something that they would face a massive backlash for.

The backlash for apocalypse, my.com as EU publisher, and delays in dates, was because many people were already skeptical of the game and these things just further insinuated the idea that "the game was a scam".

I do think that if they were to cut down classes, it should only be done after the alpha 2 phase so that people have no reason to think that its a scam.

Dummo

CaptnChuck wrote: »

I do think that if they were to cut down classes, it should only be done after the alpha 2 phase so that people have no reason to think that its a scam.

The classes are planned for alpha 1, don't think they should cut down on them after giving people a taste of them.

Songcaller

All of the classes will be in Alpha 1 (primary classes) at that point you build on the foundations, not decrease the foundations. In all your threads you have weird logic. I havent invested all of my investments for someone to cut the class I want to play.

When SWG cut classes to compete with WoW the majority of players left SWG.

grisu

Something people still confuse in this topic is what 64 represents.
64 is not the number of completely unique classes. 64 is a descriptor for general flavours of 8 classes.
I will always circle back to the warrior example we got waaay back. A warriors charge ability that takes a second to run up and smash into the enemy is enhanced by a mage augment eliminating that 1 second.
It doesn't introduce new skills to be balanced.

It enhances the class, it doesn't fundamentally change it. There will be overlaps for sure, using that blink augment will surely appear in several skills of different classes.

What it boils down too is that it's not such a massive balancing undertaking as some people make it out to be.

deakbo

This is definitely good idea, but if they want to do 8 classes let them do 8 and let them polish these classes and then after that, every few months they add an extra class would be totally awesome. Because then we can get and see fresh content.

PlagueMonk

Raengo wrote: »

But my Keeper..

It's not necessarily 64 separate classes that they are working on. More like 8 classes with different benefits depending on what secondary you choose. I think it would be a different story if all 64 classes had their own individual abilities.

I agree that's it's not a full 64 classes. It's more like 8 with a lot of minor variations. We have been told the secondaries shouldn't have a major impact on the primary so it should be easier. If you want a nightmare, DAoC had I believe 47 truly different and unique classes. Now that was a balancing act that never seemed to be resolved to any real degree.

The great thing however is the 4 archetypes cut = lots of future class expansions!

daxiongmao87

Did they ever mention what the 4 they dropped were going to be? My guess:

Monk
Druid
Berserker
Enchanter

nidriks

CaptnChuck wrote: »

Initially, IS was planning to have 12 base archetypes in the game. This would result in a whopping 144 classes. Obviously, this was an almost impossible task to take on and hence they removed 4 of those archetypes, leaving us with 64 classes.

I feel that 8 is still too many FOR LAUNCH. I feel like the ideal amount of base archetypes should just be 6 for launch: Tank, Cleric, Mage, Fighter, Rogue and Ranger.

The reason I say this is because designing and balancing abilities is something that you improve at with experience. Having 64 classes to do this for, is simply too much. If you only have 36 however, it gives you a lot more room to better design and balance these classes. This will result in the newer classes being much more better designed and balanced from the get go, as IS will have more knowledge and experience doing this.

That's why, I feel like there should only be 36 classes for launch. Every 6 months, they could add a new archetype. So we'll get bard and summoner a year after launch. After releasing bard and summoner, they could create polls to ask the community what class they want next.

What do you guys think?

I think 8 is not enough. It might only be 25 levels before the secondary archetype is chose, but having only 6 choices for those 25 levels would be restricting, in my opinion.

Everquest had 14 playable classes at release - and has since added 2 more. That may not sound as many as Ashes, but consider that augment class abilities will be drawn from the base class, and that is not a huge amount of additional design for each of the 64 augmented classes. It is just a case of deciding what they all get, maybe powering abilities down, or giving then a slightly different feel.

Now consider designing 50 levels of abilities for 14 classes. That is still a huge task.

MMOs have been dumbed down enough since WoW, with less and less classes per game. I'd rather Ashes didn't buck to that trend. SOE's MMOs had tremedous class design and I hope Ashes gives even a small glimpse of the fantastic classes SOE MMOs had. Enchanters, Beastlords, the jack of all trades Druid, Blood Mages from Vanguard and EQ2's Conjurors were all fantastic classes. No other MMO has come close since, in my opinion. Maybe SWG, but that was SOE too.

Rift announced a great idea for class design in development. The idea was to give characters skill sets from other classes, letting people change on the fly and improving people's roels in groups. They then went and introduced the ability for everyopne to self heal, and a great idea died.

GW2 went even further, completely removing the holy trinity and having so few classes.

Even if the game takes a year longer to launch, let them design 64 augmented classes. Besides, where do bards, and support, fit in in your 6 classes of tank, cleric, mage, fighter, rogue and ranger? Where are pets in those 6?

I am filled with wonder at imagining the 144 choices with 12 primary classes. I don't recall that though, and I've been here since pre-kickstarter.

nidriks

Neurath wrote: »

Fuck that. I will main Bard and I do not agree Bard should be removed. Thankfully, we have Jeff Bard who worked on Everquest and Jeff understands the use of Bards.

Only EQ2, I think. Though EQ2 did have bards, even if it suffered from too much bard love (see my other thread today).

No one like a Bard to design bards though. D'ya think he changed his name?

Medrash1

I absolutelly approve your idea! i feal like the same, 8 is too much, but 6 it' perfect in my opinion.
This way you can focus better on few classes and get a better result/job overall ... sometimes less is better than more.
I have some concerns about the Classes, but this , in my opinion , is a good start. I feal like summoners and bard are too much and too optional .
To compensate the loss you can focus to the mage and all the other Classes to get maybe a more complex and complete set of spells, getting better results and more balanced one.

In my opinion in can be semplified more, just warrior, mage and cleric... but while playing you can choose what weapon to wear and the specs . So for example you can start a warrior/fighter and then choose to focus on tanky items and builds, or bows etc. or unarmed combat. So you spec into the Class , and maybe you can be a jack of all trades

...
As a mage you can spec into the summoning school magic, or maybe druid, or a dps like a sorcerer or archmage. Bard? ..
And then you can maybe get the second class ... after your last spec? So for example ... you are a fighter/wrestler, mixed with the cleric class you get the Monk.

It's perfect , in my opinion ...
Of course you cannot advance in any spec with the secondary class, but you still can unlearn the secondary and learn another one. What do you think about that?

Oh well xD your words ... as you said less classes it result in a better overall quality and results

, i approve. Hope you follow this way, becouse it's way batter for the game i think.

Last thing .. i thought you had to build and balance only the 8 primary one ... and the mixed classes where not unique. So you actually want to build 64 or 36 unique classes with unique spells? You are crazy haha ... that's a lot guys. I thought that when you get the secondary class the character just take some of the spells and "talents" , so it's going to give us 36 unique classes? ... Or , a little unique and a little mixed otherwise the label don't make any sense.

Anyway i'm not a fan of adding more classes to the game as an expansion, becouse the game will radically change every time. It changes the lore and it doesn't make much sense to me. I like new features and patches of course, but one of the things that many companies fail to do is the update and expansion stuff.
I don't like when a game changes, but when it improves.
All the games that abused this wrong way of making content at some point have totally changed and disfigured their game ... like wow xD , but even lol and many more ... a patch needs to be a good thing. That balance the entire game first, and then add new stuff when it's needed. But adding new stuff to me means that the game isn't compleated.
If your game is funny there is no need to change it.

Don't fall in the trap of the infinite scaling and infinite upgrading. I hate when you buy a new expansion that kills your character ... your game, and makes you start over with little to no differences of gameplay.

Child Item