If a Rogue's Active Skills are evades and smokebombs and similar, and a party is marching through an open area with strong enemies, fighting for exp, and the Tank is doing a good job at tanking and therefore holding attention all of the time... what did you need the Rogue for? If they 'didn't take Backstab' and 'didn't take heavy Bleed related skills' and let's say the enemy is spiders or anything with so much health or so relatively 'little' health that poison/attrition skills, even if taken, don't matter.
The Tank is supposed to hold attention so that the Rogue can gain extra burst damage via flanking and backstabs and Bleeds. We will have to look at the Rogue Active Skill tree to know how many Active Skills don't also apply burst damage or a Bleed.
Similar to the Tank Active Skills - most of them generate Threat or provide Damage Mitigation.
As with Cleric, many of the Active Skills Heal and deal damage or deal damage and also Heal.
What he is saying is why would the rogue ever take evasion or smokebomb style abilities if the tank is doing his job. All those skills are useless in the dungeon
What he is saying is why would the rogue ever take evasion or smokebomb style abilities if the tank is doing his job. All those skills are useless in the dungeon
Most of the boss areas will be open world. Evasion and stealth will be useful in PvP. You could face PvP anywhere and its difficult to say whether the rogue would be gimped without evasion and stealth because we haven't seen the Rogue breakdown yet.
What he is saying is why would the rogue ever take evasion or smokebomb style abilities if the tank is doing his job. All those skills are useless in the dungeon
Most of the boss areas will be open world. Evasion and stealth will be useful in PvP. You could face PvP anywhere and its difficult to say whether the rogue would be gimped without evasion and stealth because we haven't seen the Rogue breakdown yet.
What I'm saying is 'there's the potential that the developer working on the Rogue breakdown might not think about this either'.
And then you get some set of people that goes 'Rogue is for damage, just put everything into damage, who needs evasion and smokebombs while leveling? Just re-spec later'.
And some set of people that goes 'you noob, why did you put more points in smokebomb and evasion before level 40? Don't come into my exp party with that garbage'.
And based on Dygz' general responses, if we imagine Dygz as the developer, the answer will be:
"You don't have to do anything they say, it's your choice if you give in to peer pressure."
All I want is a Rogue which is not backstab related. I don't like backstab builds. I will accept backstabs if they are required, but, if backstab is the main damage the gameplay will suck. I still believe we don't know enough to claim whether evasion and stealth will be required. In my mind, stealth and evasion often go hand-in-hand in a rogue's repertoire.
There will be options to create a personalised Rogue though, so, I'm not too concerned at the current disposition. I've used the stealth in Apoc and its better at range than up-close. Not even sure how effective stealth will be in the MMO.
1
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
What he is saying is why would the rogue ever take evasion or smokebomb style abilities if the tank is doing his job. All those skills are useless in the dungeon
Why would they be useless in a dungeon?
You take those skills because it's an RPG and that's the way you like to play your Rogue.
You seem to be saying, "why not just play the meta?"
It's an RPG. You don't have to play the meta. Tank doing their job does not mean the Rogue never gets hit by anything. What bonuses do Smokebomb give to Damage? Does Smokebomb also add Snares that can stack with the Ranger and Mage Snares?
Again, we would have to know how the Rogue Active Skills actually work to weigh in any meaningful way.
What happens if another group comes in to contend the encounter?
Smokebombs and Invisibility might come in handy.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
And then you get some set of people that goes 'Rogue is for damage, just put everything into damage, who needs evasion and smokebombs while leveling? Just re-spec later'.
That is an OK decision. Especially since Damage is the primary role of a Rogue.
Much better decision than the Rogue/x trying to play with Support as their primary role.
And some set of people that goes 'you noob, why did you put more points in smokebomb and evasion before level 40? Don't come into my exp party with that garbage'.
It either works or it doesn't. People will know before level 40 if it doesn't work and adjust accordingly.
And, yes, that there problem is the fault of the elitists; not the fault of the person who can get a unique build to actually work.
If someone can get having a secondary role to work well as their primary role - great.
But the devs aren't designing to ensure that that will work. Rather they are designing to ensure that all Primary Archteypes/x are viable in their primary roles.
All I want is a Rogue which is not backstab related. I don't like backstab builds. I will accept backstabs if they are required, but, if backstab is the main damage the gameplay will suck. I still believe we don't know enough to claim whether evasion and stealth will be required. In my mind, stealth and evasion often go hand-in-hand in a rogue's repertoire.
There will be options to create a personalised Rogue though, so, I'm not too concerned at the current disposition. I've used the stealth in Apoc and its better at range than up-close. Not even sure how effective stealth will be in the MMO.
How do you want to do damage, if not by Backstab?
I personally don't see Rogue's main role in a group as 'Damage', but according to Dygz that's what it is.
So how would you do enough damage to fulfill the 'requirement' of 'your main role' if not Backstab, that wasn't also just being overpowered in terms of attack output as a whole?
I'm genuinely asking, because I have not yet been able to come up with a Damage focused Rogue build for anything I design that does not take Sneak Attack/Backstab (I can easily come up with builds that have other goals and purposes within a group, but I'm going by what Dygz said... also this is a derail of this thread's main line so just in case you care to answer elsewhere)
Oddly my data has you listed as Magician. Did you reconsider, or is that an alt or the backup for if stealth isn't effective? As always, more data plz.
I theory crafted a lot and determined that with the current stats available, one can't min/max a hybrid toon effectively. Of course, the stats could change and you could switch physical damage for magic damage through crafting. So, not knowing what type of skills a Bard has, knowing what skills the Mage currently has and knowing that weapon skill trees will be added, i came to the conclusion that a straight up physical damage dealer would be the best min/max choice.
I settled on Rogue because I played Rogue in Age of Conan and in Guild Wars 2 (Older build). Also, I believe a Bard even when coupled with Mage could not perform as well as a Rogue in Bounty Hunting.
In my mind, I would link Poisons, Bleeds and executors for the main damage. It would be a cross between the Guild Wars 2 Assassin and the Age of Conan Assassin. Though backstab could be an execution ability, I would prefer stuff like Artery Slash or Neck Slash or Lotus Bomb...something other than backstab.
I theory crafted a lot and determined that with the current stats available, one can't min/max a toon effectively. Of course, the stats could change. So, not knowing what type of skills a Bard has, knowing what skills the Mage currently has and knowing that weapon skill trees will be added, i came to the conclusion that a straight up physical damage dealer would be the best min/max choice.
I settled on Rogue because I played Rogue in Age of Conan and in Guild Wars 2 (Older build). Also, I believe a Bard even when coupled with Mage could not perform as well as a Rogue in Bounty Hunting.
In my mind, I would link Poisons, Bleeds and executors for the main damage. It would be a cross between the Guild Wars 2 Assassin and the Age of Conan Assassin. Though backstab could be an execution ability, I would prefer stuff like Artery Slash or Neck Slash or Lotus Bomb...something other than backstab.
Ah yes, that can of worms has not yet been opened.
Quite frankly I believe their choices of stats are wrong, at this time. I can get behind a lot of different systems, but the current setup screams 'I haven't thought this one through fully yet'.
I'm sorry to hear that you weren't able to build your Magician, genuinely. I'll kick up a fuss about it if you want, when the time comes, assuming you didn't find the Bard Compilation concept schema unappealing too.
I wouldn't have too much faith in Rogue being more effective with the current stats, it'd either be so overpowered that it would get nerfed (it always gets nerfed. Always), or kind of meh.
Sorry, my native language is Erlang.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
All I want is a Rogue which is not backstab related. I don't like backstab builds. I will accept backstabs if they are required, but, if backstab is the main damage the gameplay will suck. I still believe we don't know enough to claim whether evasion and stealth will be required. In my mind, stealth and evasion often go hand-in-hand in a rogue's repertoire.
There will be options to create a personalised Rogue though, so, I'm not too concerned at the current disposition. I've used the stealth in Apoc and its better at range than up-close. Not even sure how effective stealth will be in the MMO.
Yeah. Seems like Bleeds are mentioned more often than Backstab.
We also do see a lot of mention of Shadow in the Rogue-related class names so, I'm curious about Shadow damage.
Another reason to anticipate that added Damage might be dealt in conjuntion with "Smokebomb".
Ah yes, that can of worms has not yet been opened.
Quite frankly I believe their choices of stats are wrong, at this time. I can get behind a lot of different systems, but the current setup screams 'I haven't thought this one through fully yet'.
I'm sorry to hear that you weren't able to build your Magician, genuinely. I'll kick up a fuss about it if you want, when the time comes, assuming you didn't find the Bard Compilation concept schema unappealing too.
I wouldn't have too much faith in Rogue being more effective with the current stats, it'd either be so overpowered that it would get nerfed (it always gets nerfed. Always), or kind of meh.
The reason it often gets nerfed is because of perma stealth and backstab combo. In Ashes there might not be perma stealth and there might not be a backstab. I think the Rogue will be very susceptible to the Tank because the Tank will have high physical resistance (one would hope) and a lot of hard CCs.
The Rogue should also have a hard counter (Could even be the Tank) if the devs haven't dropped the hard counter proposals.
@Azherae
I just want to say I like the way you word things.
@Dygz I just really hope the game isn't as black and white as you say. If it is what your interpretation of everything is, then I see this game game getting locked into meta builds in no time and half of the options of 'player choice' will be written off in no time.
Ah yes, that can of worms has not yet been opened.
Quite frankly I believe their choices of stats are wrong, at this time. I can get behind a lot of different systems, but the current setup screams 'I haven't thought this one through fully yet'.
I'm sorry to hear that you weren't able to build your Magician, genuinely. I'll kick up a fuss about it if you want, when the time comes, assuming you didn't find the Bard Compilation concept schema unappealing too.
I wouldn't have too much faith in Rogue being more effective with the current stats, it'd either be so overpowered that it would get nerfed (it always gets nerfed. Always), or kind of meh.
The reason it often gets nerfed is because of perma stealth and backstab combo. In Ashes there might not be perma stealth and there might not be a backstab. I think the Rogue will be very susceptible to the Tank because the Tank will have high physical resistance (one would hope) and a lot of hard CCs.
The Rogue should also have a hard counter (Could even be the Tank) if the devs haven't dropped the hard counter proposals.
That's one type of nerf they suffer. I'm more used to the other one, where the game is built from the beginning without the Backstab being super strong, and then Rogues get other stuff to make up for it. But then, what do you base the stats for the other stuff on? You have to let it scale by some stat.
Then it becomes a trap. Rogues that don't build for that stat don't do enough damage, or they are allowed to do enough damage and those who do build for it do ridiculous damage.
Final result is almost always 'well ok let's take off the scaling so that the Rogues who don't want to build for that stat, do enough damage comparably and don't get mistreated for build mistakes'.
And then Rogue is meh for another 2-3 years until someone re-tunes all the daggers or whatever the most powerful main weapon they can use, is.
That's one type of nerf they suffer. I'm more used to the other one, where the game is built from the beginning without the Backstab being super strong, and then Rogues get other stuff to make up for it. But then, what do you base the stats for the other stuff on? You have to let it scale by some stat.
Then it becomes a trap. Rogues that don't build for that stat don't do enough damage, or they are allowed to do enough damage and those who do build for it do ridiculous damage.
Final result is almost always 'well ok let's take off the scaling so that the Rogues who don't want to build for that stat, do enough damage comparably and don't get mistreated for build mistakes'.
And then Rogue is meh for another 2-3 years until someone re-tunes all the daggers or whatever the most powerful main weapon they can use, is.
Just my experience.
The problem will be a widespread issue because you can't build a Physical Damage Build of any type without boosting Physical Damage input through 'Power'. None of the physical damage builds can survive without 'Power'. You could unhook all the physical damage classes from 'Power' and then split them up into individual stats, but, the problem would then transfer to the individual stats and nerfs could still happen. I have other issues with the base game, but, I often don't feel like a discussion about them.
'Power' affects both Crit Damage and Basic Damage. You can see how vital 'power' would be for any physical damage dealer. If I wanted to build a Glass Cannon I could go 'Power' and 'Will' however, I don't want to play glass cannon and I don't want to be forced to do 'Power' and 'Will' so a hybrid build is out of the question for me.
That's one type of nerf they suffer. I'm more used to the other one, where the game is built from the beginning without the Backstab being super strong, and then Rogues get other stuff to make up for it. But then, what do you base the stats for the other stuff on? You have to let it scale by some stat.
Then it becomes a trap. Rogues that don't build for that stat don't do enough damage, or they are allowed to do enough damage and those who do build for it do ridiculous damage.
Final result is almost always 'well ok let's take off the scaling so that the Rogues who don't want to build for that stat, do enough damage comparably and don't get mistreated for build mistakes'.
And then Rogue is meh for another 2-3 years until someone re-tunes all the daggers or whatever the most powerful main weapon they can use, is.
Just my experience.
The problem will be a widespread issue because you can't build a Physical Damage Build of any type without boosting Physical Damage input through 'Power'. None of the physical damage builds can survive without 'Power'. You could unhook all the physical damage classes from 'Power' and then split them up into individual stats, but, the problem would then transfer to the individual stats and nerfs could still happen. I have other issues with the base game, but, I often don't feel like a discussion about them.
'Power' affects both Crit Damage and Basic Damage. You can see how vital 'power' would be for any physical damage dealer. If I wanted to build a Glass Cannon I could go 'Power' and 'Will' however, I don't want to play glass cannon and I don't want to be forced to do 'Power' and 'Will' so a hybrid build is out of the question for me.
Well, I won't press you. Just know that I am 'waiting for them to change that single Power stat' too, and I too, don't much feel like discussing all of the little bits and pieces that are standing out.
I had time during the Alpha to reverse engineer the effects of Will and Mentality on Cleric Abilities. I'll hope those formulae change too (the Regen one is kind of nice right now I guess).
Sorry, my native language is Erlang.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
@Dygz I just really hope the game isn't as black and white as you say. If it is what your interpretation of everything is, then I see this game game getting locked into meta builds in no time and half of the options of 'player choice' will be written off in no time.
It's not black and white.
It's extremely versatile.
0
Options
bloodprophetMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
You're the one (one of the people) throwing it from game development to personal attacks all the time?
Accusations which, of course, when asked to support, you fail to.
As to the first point they devs have a vision let them fill it.
Then why did they open an early Alpha forum and explicitly ask us to say how we would like things to be?
Why didn't they open a late Alpha or Beta forum?
For context:
bloodprophet wrote: »
47:57 is important.
2:01:00 talking about hybrid classes.
At one point Chris talks about going into a raid and he had changed all his enchantments to something that would offer no benefit to prove the point it was more about doing the mechanics then it was about chasing that extra .1% Over all a good conversation about game design.
47:57 is an excellent point, and I agree with it to a point... there are developers that have done this, and made a game they thought people would like and it collapsed in no time because there wasn't enough of a player base for it. I'm pretty sure there are more MMOs that have collapsed in a year or two, than MMOs that go to the distance...
WildStar for example I absolutely love that game despite it "being really difficult". It came out it was free to play in less than a year and closed down servers in three... (Still had one of my favorite tank classes ever I loved that engineer)
2:01:00
Also all good points. I hope you don't think that I've been advocating for a hybrid class or for classes to be able to multi-class at one time? More of what the druid became rather than what it was earlier on, where it can tank OR heal OR DPS... NOT do a little bit of all three at once.
It was a response to this post. Your have been throwing around the Hybrid thing since the start. Have you not? If you go watch the videos I linked with Kevin Jordan and look at what the WoW developer said about hybrids it will make more sense.
Attacking people personally over the internet is pure foolishness. I though we were discussing ideas.
Ironhope wrote:
And what about secondary class combined with talents combined with gear combined with tattoos, combined with node affiliation combined with organization/religious affiliation, racials, etc?
Should all these less important than base class (original choice of class) or not?
Less important by how much?
I think they should matter but not as much as the primary archetype. Even add together they should be no more then 30% of the classes over all power and ability.
Most people never listen. They are just waiting on you to quit making noise so they can.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
"In Ashes of Creation, we’re going big. Our current party size is sitting at eight (8) players for a single group. While that number could change before launch, it’s serving a particular goal we have for gameplay. We like the idea of having a larger party because we want to put the massive back in Massively Multiplayer. If people just want to play with four others, they can always play their favorite MOBA. The idea behind an 8-person group is to allow us to really amplify party roles, and to create a need for each of the archetypes in every party.
We can get pretty creative with encounters if we build for a representative from each of those roles."
The opposite situation happens with a DPS Cleric, and I mean full 'mace swinging Templar who basically just heals as an incidental thing'. You've certainly met one now, potentially. How many direct healing abilities does this Templar 'have to take' before they are 'what is expected in the Cleric slot'? Are they supposed to be in a DPS slot instead? But that would mean 2x Cleric and -1 of something else. But let's be 'generous' and remove our 'no backstabs, evasion-master Rogue' since they were going to do about as much damage as this DPS Cleric anyway.
I don't really understand what you mean by a DPS Cleric who basically heals as an incidental thing.
The primary role of a Cleric is Support. DPS would be a secondary role.
So, we should be expecting any Cleric/x to be primarily providing Support and secondarily providing Damage.
If what a person wants to do is primarily deal Damage and incidentally Heal, they should choose a Primary Archetype whose primary role is Damage and, perhaps, Cleric as their Secondary Archetype.
If I were to group with such a person as you describe, I would try to have some x/Clerics who focus on Life augments along to compensate.
DPS cleric.
So we are allowed to go wide or deep with our skill selection the cleric activated abilities right. I can either upgrade certain skills a lot or unlock every skill a cleric has available.
I choose to unlock and upgrade all of my damage oriented cleric abilities. And put zero effort into unlocking or upgrading anything related to healing. I'm going to wear probably mage gear I guess for maximum magic damage.
Would this not be a cleric primary, that would just be a DPS?
What he is saying is why would the rogue ever take evasion or smokebomb style abilities if the tank is doing his job. All those skills are useless in the dungeon
Why would they be useless in a dungeon?
You take those skills because it's an RPG and that's the way you like to play your Rogue.
You seem to be saying, "why not just play the meta?"
It's an RPG. You don't have to play the meta. Tank doing their job does not mean the Rogue never gets hit by anything. What bonuses do Smokebomb give to Damage? Does Smokebomb also add Snares that can stack with the Ranger and Mage Snares?
Again, we would have to know how the Rogue Active Skills actually work to weigh in any meaningful way.
What happens if another group comes in to contend the encounter?
Smokebombs and Invisibility might come in handy.
I wasn't saying it was useless
I was just trying to reword his claim since it looked like you missed the point he was trying to get at.
Smoke bombs could be useful especially if they synergize with Shadow damage and the like you said there a minute ago. Look at you thinking outside the box now... So proud🥲
😁
What it would still come down to is the same argument as no one would ever need to take and X/tank class. If the tank is doing his job properly no one would need the extra durability.
You can follow up with "what if there is some boss that also required you to tank mobs and you need an offtank?"
Well if x/tanks aren't as good as tank/x at tanking, and I need a second tank for some content why wouldn't I just get a second tank to tank those adds, that way it's not a gamble.
If a rogue using a shadow tree That uses smoke bombs and stuff doesn't do as much damage but has good utility (I'm just guessing here) he isn't going to be doing as much as he could.
And that isn't just saying that he's not following a meta that's just him not doing his job.
Unless you think there's going to be some leeway with this and me not doing my optimal damage? are we as a group still going to be able to clear content for meaningful progression if I just
DPS cleric.
So we are allowed to go wide or deep with our skill selection the cleric activated abilities right. I can either upgrade certain skills a lot or unlock every skill a cleric has available.
I choose to unlock and upgrade all of my damage oriented cleric abilities. And put zero effort into unlocking or upgrading anything related to healing. I'm going to wear probably mage gear I guess for maximum magic damage.
I dunno that I would call that a DPS Cleric. The primary role of a Cleric is Support.
And it sounds like you are choosing to gimp your character by not investing in any Support-related Active Skills.
Which would be bizarre because there are Heals that also deal Damage and Damage skills that also Heal.
How many Damage skills with no heals does a Cleric have?
So far, one:
Castigation Rank 2 - Heals
Devotion Rank 1 - Heals
Divine Censure Rank 2 - Heals
Divine Light Rank 1 - Heals
Hallowed Ground Rank 2 - Heals
Judgment - No Healing
Radiant Burst Rank 1 - Heals
Regeneration Rank 1 - Heals
Resurrection Rank 1 - Heals
I don't think a Primary Archetype Cleric can fulfill a DPS role well with no Support Active Skills.
The Ashes Cleric is already pretty much a Support primary and DPS secondary, so... I might call that a DPS Cleric by default.
The devs are designing encounters for Clerics with Support as the primary role; not Damage as the primary role.
You could choose to try a character like that though. And, as I said, if I were to group with such a character, I would try to bring along some members that are x/Cleric in order to compensate from the lack of expected Cleric/x Support.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Smoke bombs could be useful especially if they synergize with Shadow damage and the like you said there a minute ago. Look at you thinking outside the box now... So proud
😁
That's not outside the box. That's totally inside the box.
What it would still come down to is the same argument as no one would ever need to take and X/tank class. If the tank is doing his job properly no one would need the extra durability.
You can follow up with "what if there is some boss that also required you to tank mobs and you need an offtank?"
Well if x/tanks aren't as good as tank/x at tanking, and I need a second tank for some content why wouldn't I just get a second tank to tank those adds, that way it's not a gamble.
It's not about need. It's about want.
You don't choose x/Tank because you have to. You choose x/Tank because you want to.
Ashes is an RPG.
I wouldn't follow up with needing an off-tank. Encounters are balanced around the Primary Archetypes.
Summoner could off-tank if they really wanted to. Fighter might also be able to off-tank.
But, the devs state that encounters for 8-person groups will be designed to need a Tank/x... actually to need one of each Primary Archetype. So, I would not expect a Summoner to commonly be successful as a main tank.
I'm not saying it's impossible. I'm saying expect that to be rare or uncommon, rather than common.
If a rogue using a shadow tree That uses smoke bombs and stuff doesn't do as much damage but has good utility (I'm just guessing here) he isn't going to be doing as much as he could.
And that isn't just saying that he's not following a meta that's just him not doing his job.
I'm not sure what you mean.
The primary role of an Ashes Rogue is Damage. So, if the Rogue is focused on non-damage Smokebombs and the encounter is designed for a Rogue to primarily deal damage then, sure, that Rogue is not fulfilling their primary role and the group might have a challenging time defeating that encounter.
Much like Cleric and Tank Active Skills, I expect Smokebombs would most likely also deal damage by Rank 2 or Rank 3.
Unless you think there's going to be some leeway with this and me not doing my optimal damage? are we as a group still going to be able to clear content for meaningful progression if I just take those skills because it's an RPG and that's the way I like to play your Rogue.
Will I still be able to succeed at the game?
I think that, similar to the Cleric skills we've seen so far, most of the Rogue Active Skills will do whatever they do and also deal Damage - probably Shadow damage and/or Bleeds.
Again, if I were to group with a Rogue who is trying to avoid the primary role a Rogue (Damage), I would try to bring along some x/Rogues with a focus on Damage augments in order to compensate.
Unless you think there's going to be some leeway with this and me not doing my optimal damage? are we as a group still going to be able to clear content for meaningful progression if I just take those skills because it's an RPG and that's the way I like to play your Rogue.
Will I still be able to succeed at the game?
I think that, similar to the Cleric skills we've seen so far, most of the Rogue Active Skills will do whatever they do and also deal Damage - probably Shadow damage and/or Bleeds.
Again, if I were to group with a Rogue who is trying to avoid the primary role a Rogue (Damage), I would try to bring along some x/Rogues with a focus on Damage augments in order to compensate.
I'm not actively trying to avoid damage, I'm just trying to build a rogue that I think is cool.
Let's say me and my 7 friends want to clear a dungeon. All double-downs rogue/rogue, tank/tank, etc. But we just all build what we think is a cool way to play that class even if it isn't the best.
Back to smoke bombs as the example here. I put my focus on smoky assassin build, but putting points into the poisons effects deals more damage making the rogue more effective at being a DPS. I'm still a DPS I'm not actively avoiding it or anything. I'm just not playing The Meta if you will. The same goes for my whole party.
Are we going to be able to clear anything we come across because it's balanced for 8, 1 of each archtype? Or are we going to fall because we aren't optimized?
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited September 2021
Sure. You build a Rogue you think is cool and see how well it works.
And, if it doesn't work well, you make adjustments along the way as you level.
There wouldn't be a competition between Smokebomb damage and Poison damage - unless there's a specific mob that resists that damage type. It would just be different playstyles
You don't have to play the META.
You don't need to be META-optimized to defeat challenges. You just have to find strategies with what you have that are good enough to succeed.
Again, it's like card games. You don't have to have the best hand, you have to know how to synergize with your partner(s). It's more about synergizing with the group than optimizing the individual build.
@Dygz If the game boasts 64 classes and it ends up being 8 classes that play 8 different ways each (based on how you want to be identified in that role), this game will be a 50 million dollar bust.
"You don't have to play the meta or be meta-optimized to defeat challenges". Then why the are they called challenges? haha. This is an insane statement. Nobody wants to face roll the keyboard for content. Those people are subscribed to wow retail.
The fact that you think synergizing with your partners is any different than building towards the meta is ridiculous. Building towards a meta (that people theory crafted and tested) is the exact same thing as building "your way" to synergize with others (by theory crafting and testing). If you don't synergize with them, guess what....you will have to CHANGE SPECS to fit a mold that works, even if some of the players may not want to play that way. Hence...a meta! "Most effective tactics available".
Again, it's like card games. You don't have to have the best hand, you have to know how to synergize with your partner(s). It's more about synergizing with the group than optimizing the individual build.
If you feel that way about it, and it's just a matter of fitting all the right parts and pieces in a party why are you so against flexibility in roles.
As you pointed out almost every cleric ability has some sort of heal built into it, what if every cleric augment has some sort of heal built into it so now every time my fighter/cleric or mage/cleric uses an ability I heal myself and those around me. If I equip gear that does bonus healing instead of damage. why can't I make a weird healer? That's not hurting the game any, it's just being quirky and fun.
2
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited September 2021
It's not just 8 different ways.
It's 1 Primary Archetype x 8 Secondary Archetpyes x 4 augment Schools x 9 Racial augment paths.
Plus 1 Node augment path x 3 Social Org augment paths x 7 Religious augment paths.
There is quite a bit of room between face-rolling and Meta. It's not binary.
You don't have to be the best at something to win. That doesn't mean the win wasn't challenging.
Synergizing with your partners is working towards a win. That win does not have to be the most efficient tactics. It just needs to be good enough to win.
It might be very helpful to change specs. Or it might be fine to just find a winning strategy without changing specs.
Doesn't necessarily have to be the most efficient tactics available to win. Some people obsess over efficiency and others don't:
mark 5:16 "It's inevitable that some people start to want efficiency. I personally don't enjoy games that are based on efficiency."
---Yoshi-P
https://youtu.be/U8UmFQGDnI4?t=3628 STEVEN:"Back in the day, when MMOs were great, you had to win your encounters through trial and error. You didn't have a DPS meter telling you, "Oh! We need to get up to 67.7% damage in order to achieve the whatever!" It wasn't some mechanical bullshit experience where you got to look at a graph or chart and say, "Oh! We need to do exactly this." Instead, you actually had to be present, you had to watch what was happening, you had to help your fellow guild members learn how to play the game and you had to excel as a group.
Now, that is the type of experience we want to replicate: that everybody is in this together type of scenario where we build the teams we are friends with up and we accomplish content together. It kind of also provides this mystery effect, where you're required to actually participate and watch what's going on and not just rely on that DPS meter."
Same is true for obsessing over the most efficient tactics available.
Thank you @Dygz. That precisely fulfills my requirement in every way.
What I'm about to say may be ... 'offensive' to you by certain standards (I don't know for sure) so I put it in tags in case you prefer to read it at a time when you are less likely to perceive it as an attack on you, just in case that helps.
I asked this because you are my litmus test for something. I don't like your designs, or your ideas. I'd never be willing to play a game you made, and that's fine. But there are a lot of things you support, believe, or such, that I would never have thought possible. That I consider obviously contradictory or in defiance of formal and informal logic. I do not mean to disrespect your position by saying this (any more than is unavoidable by saying I consider you illogical). It can just as easily be my failing. But what it gives me is insight. It is always possible that there is a designer, somewhere, perhaps even at Intrepid, who is able to hold the exact same mindsets as you, and justify things I would think of as failures in logic in the exact same ways you do.
And that would mean that Ashes has the potential to be developed with this (in my mind) lack of internal logic. So it's concerning. It fosters 'fear' as you have pointed out multiple times. Yes. I outright fear the concept of a game developed by someone with your ability to bypass things I consider logical. Now, this is obviously no big deal, I don't have to play it, but I started without this insight. I saw what Intrepid offered, and I followed my own logic. Only through you, have I been offered this looking-glass into a world that I can fear. The illumination of my ignorance.
It is possible that Ashes will be designed from the mindset that you use to speak, and so, I cringe, and I doubt, and I consider my options. Because whether you are right or wrong to hold the perspectives you do, you are the reminder. Caveat emptor.
Knowing your flow, it won't matter, I will hope for just the usual dismissive 'lmao' equivalent.
/looks around
Dygz's last post made perfect sense to me, and I am quietly proud of seeing myself as pragmatic and logical, with a leaning towards simplicity.
A simple idea executed outstandingly is a thing of beauty, no sense in marring it with superfluous trappings.
The Trinity is a straight forward idea and environment for players to test the limits within the constraint.
The idea that 'moar freedom' is conducive to either ingenuity or lasting enjoyment is flawed. Freedoms have limits, but people generally get emotional and fail to see that.
"But ashes is a sandbox game!"
With a very defined framework (constraint), character paths (constraint) and game loops (constraint).
Its not 'freedom' of the sand that makes building sandcastles on the beach fun, its the tools (constraints) that allow you to make the best (subjective) castle.
Back in the day, when MMOs were great, you had to win your encounters through trial and error. You didn't have a DPS meter telling you, 'Oh! We need to get up to 67.7% damage in order to achieve the whatever!' It wasn't some mechanical bullshit experience where you got to look at a graph or chart and say, 'Oh! We need to do exactly this.' Instead, you actually had to be present, you had to watch what was happening, you had to help your fellow guild members learn how to play the game and you had to excel as a group."
I dont know why you keep reposting this quote, all it does is make Steven look foolish.
That back in the day he is talking about - combat trackers existed. He didnt know they existed, because he wasnt a part of that scene - he saw those great encounters that others were killing, but had no actual idea how they were doing it.
He assumed combat trackers didnt exist until he found out about them.
The earliest combat tracker for an online game (not even an MMO) I have found so far was for Neverwinter, and it was around in 1995. I'm sure there were trackers before that, i just haven't found them. No doubt some existed for tabletop gaming as well.
This means Steven's idea of "back when MMO's were great" has to be before 1995. Since the first game that is largely regarded as an MMO is Meridian59, which was released in 1996, that means the good old days of MMO's, according to Steven, lasted negative one year.
There was literally never a time when MMO's as a genre existed and combat trackers as a concept didnt.
The fact that some people didnt know about them until 10+ years later doesnt mean they didnt exist, or that they weren't key for people killing top end content, it just means people not in that circle didnt know about them.
The other reason that statement from Steven should be a source of embarrassment for him is that he is functionally incorrect on what a combat tracker does. He says it tells you that you need to do 67.7% damage (used as an example, but still). The problem here is that a combat tracker does not and physically can not tell you what you need to do on order to kill an encounter. It simply isnt in a combat trackers perview to provide anything other than information on what has happened.
In order for a combat tracker to tell the player what the player needs to do to kill the encounter the game itself would need to tell the combat tracker what is needed to kill the encounter - and all a combat tracker does is interpret information passed from the game to the player.
So if a combat tracker tells you that you need to do X to kill an encounter, that is actually the game telling you what you need to do to kill the encounter, and the combat tracker just interpreting that information and passing it on.
If the game doesn't do that, the combat tracker cant pass that on to the player.
So, Steven is taking a firm stance against something he neither knows the history of, nor the function of. He is claiming things were better before they existed, oblivious to the fact that they have existed longer than the genre itself has existed.
Comments
Yep. That was all fine with me.
What he is saying is why would the rogue ever take evasion or smokebomb style abilities if the tank is doing his job. All those skills are useless in the dungeon
Most of the boss areas will be open world. Evasion and stealth will be useful in PvP. You could face PvP anywhere and its difficult to say whether the rogue would be gimped without evasion and stealth because we haven't seen the Rogue breakdown yet.
What I'm saying is 'there's the potential that the developer working on the Rogue breakdown might not think about this either'.
And then you get some set of people that goes 'Rogue is for damage, just put everything into damage, who needs evasion and smokebombs while leveling? Just re-spec later'.
And some set of people that goes 'you noob, why did you put more points in smokebomb and evasion before level 40? Don't come into my exp party with that garbage'.
And based on Dygz' general responses, if we imagine Dygz as the developer, the answer will be:
"You don't have to do anything they say, it's your choice if you give in to peer pressure."
There will be options to create a personalised Rogue though, so, I'm not too concerned at the current disposition. I've used the stealth in Apoc and its better at range than up-close. Not even sure how effective stealth will be in the MMO.
You take those skills because it's an RPG and that's the way you like to play your Rogue.
You seem to be saying, "why not just play the meta?"
It's an RPG. You don't have to play the meta. Tank doing their job does not mean the Rogue never gets hit by anything. What bonuses do Smokebomb give to Damage? Does Smokebomb also add Snares that can stack with the Ranger and Mage Snares?
Again, we would have to know how the Rogue Active Skills actually work to weigh in any meaningful way.
What happens if another group comes in to contend the encounter?
Smokebombs and Invisibility might come in handy.
That is an OK decision. Especially since Damage is the primary role of a Rogue.
Much better decision than the Rogue/x trying to play with Support as their primary role.
It either works or it doesn't. People will know before level 40 if it doesn't work and adjust accordingly.
And, yes, that there problem is the fault of the elitists; not the fault of the person who can get a unique build to actually work.
If someone can get having a secondary role to work well as their primary role - great.
But the devs aren't designing to ensure that that will work. Rather they are designing to ensure that all Primary Archteypes/x are viable in their primary roles.
How do you want to do damage, if not by Backstab?
I personally don't see Rogue's main role in a group as 'Damage', but according to Dygz that's what it is.
So how would you do enough damage to fulfill the 'requirement' of 'your main role' if not Backstab, that wasn't also just being overpowered in terms of attack output as a whole?
I'm genuinely asking, because I have not yet been able to come up with a Damage focused Rogue build for anything I design that does not take Sneak Attack/Backstab (I can easily come up with builds that have other goals and purposes within a group, but I'm going by what Dygz said... also this is a derail of this thread's main line so just in case you care to answer elsewhere)
Oddly my data has you listed as Magician. Did you reconsider, or is that an alt or the backup for if stealth isn't effective? As always, more data plz.
I settled on Rogue because I played Rogue in Age of Conan and in Guild Wars 2 (Older build). Also, I believe a Bard even when coupled with Mage could not perform as well as a Rogue in Bounty Hunting.
In my mind, I would link Poisons, Bleeds and executors for the main damage. It would be a cross between the Guild Wars 2 Assassin and the Age of Conan Assassin. Though backstab could be an execution ability, I would prefer stuff like Artery Slash or Neck Slash or Lotus Bomb...something other than backstab.
Edit: Spelling mistakes.
Ah yes, that can of worms has not yet been opened.
Quite frankly I believe their choices of stats are wrong, at this time. I can get behind a lot of different systems, but the current setup screams 'I haven't thought this one through fully yet'.
I'm sorry to hear that you weren't able to build your Magician, genuinely. I'll kick up a fuss about it if you want, when the time comes, assuming you didn't find the Bard Compilation concept schema unappealing too.
I wouldn't have too much faith in Rogue being more effective with the current stats, it'd either be so overpowered that it would get nerfed (it always gets nerfed. Always), or kind of meh.
We also do see a lot of mention of Shadow in the Rogue-related class names so, I'm curious about Shadow damage.
Another reason to anticipate that added Damage might be dealt in conjuntion with "Smokebomb".
The reason it often gets nerfed is because of perma stealth and backstab combo. In Ashes there might not be perma stealth and there might not be a backstab. I think the Rogue will be very susceptible to the Tank because the Tank will have high physical resistance (one would hope) and a lot of hard CCs.
The Rogue should also have a hard counter (Could even be the Tank) if the devs haven't dropped the hard counter proposals.
I just want to say I like the way you word things.
@Dygz I just really hope the game isn't as black and white as you say. If it is what your interpretation of everything is, then I see this game game getting locked into meta builds in no time and half of the options of 'player choice' will be written off in no time.
That's one type of nerf they suffer. I'm more used to the other one, where the game is built from the beginning without the Backstab being super strong, and then Rogues get other stuff to make up for it. But then, what do you base the stats for the other stuff on? You have to let it scale by some stat.
Then it becomes a trap. Rogues that don't build for that stat don't do enough damage, or they are allowed to do enough damage and those who do build for it do ridiculous damage.
Final result is almost always 'well ok let's take off the scaling so that the Rogues who don't want to build for that stat, do enough damage comparably and don't get mistreated for build mistakes'.
And then Rogue is meh for another 2-3 years until someone re-tunes all the daggers or whatever the most powerful main weapon they can use, is.
Just my experience.
The problem will be a widespread issue because you can't build a Physical Damage Build of any type without boosting Physical Damage input through 'Power'. None of the physical damage builds can survive without 'Power'. You could unhook all the physical damage classes from 'Power' and then split them up into individual stats, but, the problem would then transfer to the individual stats and nerfs could still happen. I have other issues with the base game, but, I often don't feel like a discussion about them.
'Power' affects both Crit Damage and Basic Damage. You can see how vital 'power' would be for any physical damage dealer. If I wanted to build a Glass Cannon I could go 'Power' and 'Will' however, I don't want to play glass cannon and I don't want to be forced to do 'Power' and 'Will' so a hybrid build is out of the question for me.
Well, I won't press you. Just know that I am 'waiting for them to change that single Power stat' too, and I too, don't much feel like discussing all of the little bits and pieces that are standing out.
I had time during the Alpha to reverse engineer the effects of Will and Mentality on Cleric Abilities. I'll hope those formulae change too (the Regen one is kind of nice right now I guess).
It's extremely versatile.
For context:
bloodprophet wrote: »
47:57 is important.
2:01:00 talking about hybrid classes.
At one point Chris talks about going into a raid and he had changed all his enchantments to something that would offer no benefit to prove the point it was more about doing the mechanics then it was about chasing that extra .1% Over all a good conversation about game design.
47:57 is an excellent point, and I agree with it to a point... there are developers that have done this, and made a game they thought people would like and it collapsed in no time because there wasn't enough of a player base for it. I'm pretty sure there are more MMOs that have collapsed in a year or two, than MMOs that go to the distance...
WildStar for example I absolutely love that game despite it "being really difficult". It came out it was free to play in less than a year and closed down servers in three... (Still had one of my favorite tank classes ever I loved that engineer)
2:01:00
Also all good points. I hope you don't think that I've been advocating for a hybrid class or for classes to be able to multi-class at one time? More of what the druid became rather than what it was earlier on, where it can tank OR heal OR DPS... NOT do a little bit of all three at once.
It was a response to this post. Your have been throwing around the Hybrid thing since the start. Have you not? If you go watch the videos I linked with Kevin Jordan and look at what the WoW developer said about hybrids it will make more sense.
Attacking people personally over the internet is pure foolishness. I though we were discussing ideas.
Ironhope wrote:
And what about secondary class combined with talents combined with gear combined with tattoos, combined with node affiliation combined with organization/religious affiliation, racials, etc?
Should all these less important than base class (original choice of class) or not?
Less important by how much?
I think they should matter but not as much as the primary archetype. Even add together they should be no more then 30% of the classes over all power and ability.
https://ashesofcreation.com/news/group-dynamics
"In Ashes of Creation, we’re going big. Our current party size is sitting at eight (8) players for a single group. While that number could change before launch, it’s serving a particular goal we have for gameplay. We like the idea of having a larger party because we want to put the massive back in Massively Multiplayer. If people just want to play with four others, they can always play their favorite MOBA. The idea behind an 8-person group is to allow us to really amplify party roles, and to create a need for each of the archetypes in every party.
We can get pretty creative with encounters if we build for a representative from each of those roles."
DPS cleric.
So we are allowed to go wide or deep with our skill selection the cleric activated abilities right. I can either upgrade certain skills a lot or unlock every skill a cleric has available.
I choose to unlock and upgrade all of my damage oriented cleric abilities. And put zero effort into unlocking or upgrading anything related to healing. I'm going to wear probably mage gear I guess for maximum magic damage.
Would this not be a cleric primary, that would just be a DPS?
I wasn't saying it was useless
I was just trying to reword his claim since it looked like you missed the point he was trying to get at.
Smoke bombs could be useful especially if they synergize with Shadow damage and the like you said there a minute ago. Look at you thinking outside the box now... So proud🥲
😁
What it would still come down to is the same argument as no one would ever need to take and X/tank class. If the tank is doing his job properly no one would need the extra durability.
You can follow up with "what if there is some boss that also required you to tank mobs and you need an offtank?"
Well if x/tanks aren't as good as tank/x at tanking, and I need a second tank for some content why wouldn't I just get a second tank to tank those adds, that way it's not a gamble.
If a rogue using a shadow tree That uses smoke bombs and stuff doesn't do as much damage but has good utility (I'm just guessing here) he isn't going to be doing as much as he could.
And that isn't just saying that he's not following a meta that's just him not doing his job.
Unless you think there's going to be some leeway with this and me not doing my optimal damage? are we as a group still going to be able to clear content for meaningful progression if I just Will I still be able to succeed at the game?
And it sounds like you are choosing to gimp your character by not investing in any Support-related Active Skills.
Which would be bizarre because there are Heals that also deal Damage and Damage skills that also Heal.
How many Damage skills with no heals does a Cleric have?
So far, one:
Castigation Rank 2 - Heals
Devotion Rank 1 - Heals
Divine Censure Rank 2 - Heals
Divine Light Rank 1 - Heals
Hallowed Ground Rank 2 - Heals
Judgment - No Healing
Radiant Burst Rank 1 - Heals
Regeneration Rank 1 - Heals
Resurrection Rank 1 - Heals
I don't think a Primary Archetype Cleric can fulfill a DPS role well with no Support Active Skills.
The Ashes Cleric is already pretty much a Support primary and DPS secondary, so... I might call that a DPS Cleric by default.
The devs are designing encounters for Clerics with Support as the primary role; not Damage as the primary role.
You could choose to try a character like that though. And, as I said, if I were to group with such a character, I would try to bring along some members that are x/Cleric in order to compensate from the lack of expected Cleric/x Support.
It's not about need. It's about want.
You don't choose x/Tank because you have to. You choose x/Tank because you want to.
Ashes is an RPG.
I wouldn't follow up with needing an off-tank. Encounters are balanced around the Primary Archetypes.
Summoner could off-tank if they really wanted to. Fighter might also be able to off-tank.
But, the devs state that encounters for 8-person groups will be designed to need a Tank/x... actually to need one of each Primary Archetype. So, I would not expect a Summoner to commonly be successful as a main tank.
I'm not saying it's impossible. I'm saying expect that to be rare or uncommon, rather than common.
I'm not sure what you mean.
The primary role of an Ashes Rogue is Damage. So, if the Rogue is focused on non-damage Smokebombs and the encounter is designed for a Rogue to primarily deal damage then, sure, that Rogue is not fulfilling their primary role and the group might have a challenging time defeating that encounter.
Much like Cleric and Tank Active Skills, I expect Smokebombs would most likely also deal damage by Rank 2 or Rank 3.
I think that, similar to the Cleric skills we've seen so far, most of the Rogue Active Skills will do whatever they do and also deal Damage - probably Shadow damage and/or Bleeds.
Again, if I were to group with a Rogue who is trying to avoid the primary role a Rogue (Damage), I would try to bring along some x/Rogues with a focus on Damage augments in order to compensate.
I'm not actively trying to avoid damage, I'm just trying to build a rogue that I think is cool.
Let's say me and my 7 friends want to clear a dungeon. All double-downs rogue/rogue, tank/tank, etc. But we just all build what we think is a cool way to play that class even if it isn't the best.
Back to smoke bombs as the example here. I put my focus on smoky assassin build, but putting points into the poisons effects deals more damage making the rogue more effective at being a DPS. I'm still a DPS I'm not actively avoiding it or anything. I'm just not playing The Meta if you will. The same goes for my whole party.
Are we going to be able to clear anything we come across because it's balanced for 8, 1 of each archtype? Or are we going to fall because we aren't optimized?
And, if it doesn't work well, you make adjustments along the way as you level.
There wouldn't be a competition between Smokebomb damage and Poison damage - unless there's a specific mob that resists that damage type. It would just be different playstyles
You don't have to play the META.
You don't need to be META-optimized to defeat challenges. You just have to find strategies with what you have that are good enough to succeed.
Again, it's like card games. You don't have to have the best hand, you have to know how to synergize with your partner(s). It's more about synergizing with the group than optimizing the individual build.
"You don't have to play the meta or be meta-optimized to defeat challenges". Then why the are they called challenges? haha. This is an insane statement. Nobody wants to face roll the keyboard for content. Those people are subscribed to wow retail.
The fact that you think synergizing with your partners is any different than building towards the meta is ridiculous. Building towards a meta (that people theory crafted and tested) is the exact same thing as building "your way" to synergize with others (by theory crafting and testing). If you don't synergize with them, guess what....you will have to CHANGE SPECS to fit a mold that works, even if some of the players may not want to play that way. Hence...a meta! "Most effective tactics available".
As you pointed out almost every cleric ability has some sort of heal built into it, what if every cleric augment has some sort of heal built into it so now every time my fighter/cleric or mage/cleric uses an ability I heal myself and those around me. If I equip gear that does bonus healing instead of damage. why can't I make a weird healer? That's not hurting the game any, it's just being quirky and fun.
It's 1 Primary Archetype x 8 Secondary Archetpyes x 4 augment Schools x 9 Racial augment paths.
Plus 1 Node augment path x 3 Social Org augment paths x 7 Religious augment paths.
There is quite a bit of room between face-rolling and Meta. It's not binary.
You don't have to be the best at something to win. That doesn't mean the win wasn't challenging.
Synergizing with your partners is working towards a win. That win does not have to be the most efficient tactics. It just needs to be good enough to win.
It might be very helpful to change specs. Or it might be fine to just find a winning strategy without changing specs.
Doesn't necessarily have to be the most efficient tactics available to win. Some people obsess over efficiency and others don't:
mark 5:16
"It's inevitable that some people start to want efficiency. I personally don't enjoy games that are based on efficiency."
---Yoshi-P
STEVEN:"Back in the day, when MMOs were great, you had to win your encounters through trial and error. You didn't have a DPS meter telling you, "Oh! We need to get up to 67.7% damage in order to achieve the whatever!" It wasn't some mechanical bullshit experience where you got to look at a graph or chart and say, "Oh! We need to do exactly this." Instead, you actually had to be present, you had to watch what was happening, you had to help your fellow guild members learn how to play the game and you had to excel as a group.
Now, that is the type of experience we want to replicate: that everybody is in this together type of scenario where we build the teams we are friends with up and we accomplish content together. It kind of also provides this mystery effect, where you're required to actually participate and watch what's going on and not just rely on that DPS meter."
Same is true for obsessing over the most efficient tactics available.
/looks around
Dygz's last post made perfect sense to me, and I am quietly proud of seeing myself as pragmatic and logical, with a leaning towards simplicity.
A simple idea executed outstandingly is a thing of beauty, no sense in marring it with superfluous trappings.
The Trinity is a straight forward idea and environment for players to test the limits within the constraint.
The idea that 'moar freedom' is conducive to either ingenuity or lasting enjoyment is flawed. Freedoms have limits, but people generally get emotional and fail to see that.
"But ashes is a sandbox game!"
With a very defined framework (constraint), character paths (constraint) and game loops (constraint).
Its not 'freedom' of the sand that makes building sandcastles on the beach fun, its the tools (constraints) that allow you to make the best (subjective) castle.
I dont know why you keep reposting this quote, all it does is make Steven look foolish.
That back in the day he is talking about - combat trackers existed. He didnt know they existed, because he wasnt a part of that scene - he saw those great encounters that others were killing, but had no actual idea how they were doing it.
He assumed combat trackers didnt exist until he found out about them.
The earliest combat tracker for an online game (not even an MMO) I have found so far was for Neverwinter, and it was around in 1995. I'm sure there were trackers before that, i just haven't found them. No doubt some existed for tabletop gaming as well.
This means Steven's idea of "back when MMO's were great" has to be before 1995. Since the first game that is largely regarded as an MMO is Meridian59, which was released in 1996, that means the good old days of MMO's, according to Steven, lasted negative one year.
There was literally never a time when MMO's as a genre existed and combat trackers as a concept didnt.
The fact that some people didnt know about them until 10+ years later doesnt mean they didnt exist, or that they weren't key for people killing top end content, it just means people not in that circle didnt know about them.
The other reason that statement from Steven should be a source of embarrassment for him is that he is functionally incorrect on what a combat tracker does. He says it tells you that you need to do 67.7% damage (used as an example, but still). The problem here is that a combat tracker does not and physically can not tell you what you need to do on order to kill an encounter. It simply isnt in a combat trackers perview to provide anything other than information on what has happened.
In order for a combat tracker to tell the player what the player needs to do to kill the encounter the game itself would need to tell the combat tracker what is needed to kill the encounter - and all a combat tracker does is interpret information passed from the game to the player.
So if a combat tracker tells you that you need to do X to kill an encounter, that is actually the game telling you what you need to do to kill the encounter, and the combat tracker just interpreting that information and passing it on.
If the game doesn't do that, the combat tracker cant pass that on to the player.
So, Steven is taking a firm stance against something he neither knows the history of, nor the function of. He is claiming things were better before they existed, oblivious to the fact that they have existed longer than the genre itself has existed.