Class/Weapon combination expectations

I have been thinking recently about what class I will want to play with which race and with which weapon. Based on the fact that you will be able to wear any armor and equip any weapon (with some restrictions based on ranged/melee and class abilities requiring a bow like Ranger PowerShot). What is your current expectations for viability of weapons and classes such as a two handed sword wielding Mage (making a sort of battle mage hybrid with the augment class being tank/fighter for example) or a Pike/Halberd wielding Cleric/X. Do you expect these to be miles worse than the "classic choices" of mage with a staff etc.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

SirChancelot

Optics2134 wrote: »

I think in A2 they are going to try to nail down some core mechanics of combat. Like, active block, resource pools stam,magic,energy ect... I think once they make those decisions we will start to see how builds and play styles will develope. I mean one of the most recent topics is auto attacks yes or no?

I myself have some really high hopes for the different builds and playstyles that people will create. I have taken up reading peoples reactions an opinions on AOC as a hobby lately. And across the board it seems the primary "want" is a combat system that feels good to play and that isnt super meta min max mentality. The play this build or no one will group with you crap that most games have. I'm sure AoC sees these too and have several "versions or styles" they will give us to test.

Congrats on the almost one year rez.

But I'm with you, I'm hoping for variety.

If every tank has to use a shield to fulfill his role in the party that would be a huge bummer. I hope weapons let you play different and at least most of the options are equally as viable.

Enigmatic Sage

oooh i'll join in on the rez...

Do you think certain abilities will require certain weapon types work or affect efficiency?
1h vs 2h?
thrust(pierce) vs slash vs smash?

this would open up a lot of options for class personalisation

Also, as someone who enjoys souls borne games I hope we can see some great weapon manipulations but not necessarily as dramatic. Obviously referring to abilities from the Carrion great sword in elden ring, resins, VFX lingering post ability depending on augment.

Solvryn

People make the weapon, just like people make the class.

Songcaller

I don't have an issue with Templars using two handed weapons. Bear Shaman in Age of Conan used a Two Handed Hammer and fought in melee. I'm also not adverse to Templars dual wielding either. I feel some builds will take longer to create than others - especially if you have to wait for crafted items, enchanted items and horizontally changed items. The good news is you can get BiS Crafted Gear so you won't have to rely on item drops. You might not be able to use a Unique Legendary (Depends how many styles/ stat distributions Unique Legendaries will have) but with the transmogs and the kickstarter backing rewards you'd still have beautiful weapons with skill fx, skin fx and of course your chosen appearance for the weapon(s).

Edit: I think you could horizontally enchanted a Unique Legendary to change the stats, however, not much is known about Unique Legendaries and the Unique Legendary might lose flavour/context/uniqueness if the stats can be changed.

lunarsky

George_Black wrote: »

"I can have both" sums up why we have problems in the world.

It's not that deep my guy. You may want to find a new game to play though if people not fitting into your vision of how the class should play or look irritates you so.

Variety is what will make the game more interesting.

lunarsky

Enigmatic Sage wrote: »

oooh i'll join in on the rez...

Do you think certain abilities will require certain weapon types work or affect efficiency?
1h vs 2h?
thrust(pierce) vs slash vs smash?

this would open up a lot of options for class personalisation

Also, as someone who enjoys souls borne games I hope we can see some great weapon manipulations but not necessarily as dramatic. Obviously referring to abilities from the Carrion great sword in elden ring, resins, VFX lingering post ability depending on augment.

I could see this being the case in some instances. For example, you cannot backstab as a rogue with a mace.

I'm very curious to see what kinds of enchantments or crafting augments we'll be able to do. I expect your standard +stats, +elemental damage type stuff but adding debuffs on hit? (5% chance to paralyze for 3 seconds) is an unknown. Likely would make PvP a nightmare if they added stuff like that though.

Saabynator

Honestly. I like the old school ways. When playing something like ESO, it just feels wrong, that a spellcaster can be the best tank, and a rogue can be the best healer - or whatever. A wizard with S&B or tank with staff... It just feels silly, because it does not seem logical in any ways. If you have heavy armor, heavy weapons makes more sense. You can get hit in the armor, and shrug it off. If you wanna be fast, a twohanded axe is not what you want. Slow swings dont work in a robe, you need to be able to move.

I am a huge fan of having a role. you pick that role, and thats what you can get good at. AoC actually had a helluva an idea, with having second classes that does not change your role, just how the role function. Great idea.

Having some weapons have abilities, GW2 style is really awesome. But a necromancer is a necromancer, he does not stop to suddenly tank or healer, he will cast DoTs, have pets etc. But having some difference in how he plays his role, as better AoEs with staffs, but better DoTRs with dagger, thats awesome.

Songcaller

Metas will form anyway. You might be excluded from groups if you have a weird composition. We just don't know but right now its good to theory craft and design your toon how you want. Its a great opportunity for players to create a perfect toon in their eyes. Many players don't like traditional stereotypes.

Solvryn

Saabynator wrote: »

Honestly. I like the old school ways. When playing something like ESO, it just feels wrong, that a spellcaster can be the best tank, and a rogue can be the best healer - or whatever. A wizard with S&B or tank with staff... It just feels silly, because it does not seem logical in any ways. If you have heavy armor, heavy weapons makes more sense. You can get hit in the armor, and shrug it off. If you wanna be fast, a twohanded axe is not what you want. Slow swings dont work in a robe, you need to be able to move.

I am a huge fan of having a role. you pick that role, and thats what you can get good at. AoC actually had a helluva an idea, with having second classes that does not change your role, just how the role function. Great idea.

Having some weapons have abilities, GW2 style is really awesome. But a necromancer is a necromancer, he does not stop to suddenly tank or healer, he will cast DoTs, have pets etc. But having some difference in how he plays his role, as better AoEs with staffs, but better DoTRs with dagger, thats awesome.

ESO should have never had classes.

lunarsky

Saabynator wrote: »

Honestly. I like the old school ways. When playing something like ESO, it just feels wrong, that a spellcaster can be the best tank, and a rogue can be the best healer - or whatever. A wizard with S&B or tank with staff... It just feels silly, because it does not seem logical in any ways. If you have heavy armor, heavy weapons makes more sense. You can get hit in the armor, and shrug it off. If you wanna be fast, a twohanded axe is not what you want. Slow swings dont work in a robe, you need to be able to move.

I am a huge fan of having a role. you pick that role, and thats what you can get good at. AoC actually had a helluva an idea, with having second classes that does not change your role, just how the role function. Great idea.

Having some weapons have abilities, GW2 style is really awesome. But a necromancer is a necromancer, he does not stop to suddenly tank or healer, he will cast DoTs, have pets etc. But having some difference in how he plays his role, as better AoEs with staffs, but better DoTRs with dagger, thats awesome.

I don't think that would ever happen. Weapon choices are open but it's not going to change the role of the class. A mage won't be a tank as they shouldn't have any taunting abilities for example. They're still a spellcaster first and foremost and their skills will reflect that so ESO takes it a bit further than AoC will.

Heavy armor = heavy weapons doesn't quite necessarily align in my head. Heavy armor + Heavy weapons would mean you're even slower to attack. You'd hit harder per hit but the time in between is just increased to offset that extra damage. It's really just aesthetics. In the case of a tank their job is to take damage or mitigate it. What difference does it make if they block with a shield, parry with pair of swords, dodge outright, or deflect/parry with a larger 2h weapon? It shouldn't really matter one way or the other. They're still keeping enemies focused on them and negating or mitigating the damage. Healers casting spells through a holy staff, wand, orb, sword, tome, or mace shouldn't make a difference. It's all fantasy to me at least.

Ruerik

lunarsky wrote: »

and you should be able to because you can craft weapons and determine stats based on that. Steven has already said any class can use any weapon or armor. They showed a mage using a greatsword in one of the live letters a couple months back.

Which I find awesome, as age of conans Herald of Xotli was a mage, using a greatsword, and great at setting things on fire

SirChancelot

Saabynator wrote: »

Honestly. I like the old school ways. When playing something like ESO, it just feels wrong, that a spellcaster can be the best tank, and a rogue can be the best healer - or whatever. A wizard with S&B or tank with staff... It just feels silly, because it does not seem logical in any ways. If you have heavy armor, heavy weapons makes more sense. You can get hit in the armor, and shrug it off. If you wanna be fast, a twohanded axe is not what you want. Slow swings dont work in a robe, you need to be able to move.

I am a huge fan of having a role. you pick that role, and thats what you can get good at. AoC actually had a helluva an idea, with having second classes that does not change your role, just how the role function. Great idea.

Having some weapons have abilities, GW2 style is really awesome. But a necromancer is a necromancer, he does not stop to suddenly tank or healer, he will cast DoTs, have pets etc. But having some difference in how he plays his role, as better AoEs with staffs, but better DoTRs with dagger, thats awesome.

Sure, some things would be silly and probably not work, but I don't think that's what anyone is asking for. If someone Is rolling a tank/tank no I don't think they should walk around with a wand... But if they are a mage/tank or tank/mage and do things magic'y any kind of wand, book, or staff should be viable.

As I said I just hope tanks aren't locked into you HAVE to use a shield to be the best at your job... And what I mean by that is I want other gear loadouts to be equally viable and not have tanks without shields be subpar to tanks with shields.
I get that this would also be dependent on secondary archetype. A tank/tank would probably have more synergy with a shield where maybe a tank/summoner or summoner/tank could rock a staff if they work differently than the standard sword and board approach.

But I have different views I know. I still want archetypes to have flexibility and not be locked into a role at level 1.

Songcaller

SirChancelot wrote: »

Saabynator wrote: »

Honestly. I like the old school ways. When playing something like ESO, it just feels wrong, that a spellcaster can be the best tank, and a rogue can be the best healer - or whatever. A wizard with S&B or tank with staff... It just feels silly, because it does not seem logical in any ways. If you have heavy armor, heavy weapons makes more sense. You can get hit in the armor, and shrug it off. If you wanna be fast, a twohanded axe is not what you want. Slow swings dont work in a robe, you need to be able to move.

I am a huge fan of having a role. you pick that role, and thats what you can get good at. AoC actually had a helluva an idea, with having second classes that does not change your role, just how the role function. Great idea.

Having some weapons have abilities, GW2 style is really awesome. But a necromancer is a necromancer, he does not stop to suddenly tank or healer, he will cast DoTs, have pets etc. But having some difference in how he plays his role, as better AoEs with staffs, but better DoTRs with dagger, thats awesome.

Sure, some things would be silly and probably not work, but I don't think that's what anyone is asking for. If someone Is rolling a tank/tank no I don't think they should walk around with a wand... But if they are a mage/tank or tank/mage and do things magic'y any kind of wand, book, or staff should be viable.

As I said I just hope tanks aren't locked into you HAVE to use a shield to be the best at your job... And what I mean by that is I want other gear loadouts to be equally viable and not have tanks without shields be subpar to tanks with shields.
I get that this would also be dependent on secondary archetype. A tank/tank would probably have more synergy with a shield where maybe a tank/summoner or summoner/tank could rock a staff if they work differently than the standard sword and board approach.

But I have different views I know. I still want archetypes to have flexibility and not be locked into a role at level 1.

You could build an evasion tank and use a two handed weapon or whatever.

Depraved

tank/mage would still use a sword and a shield, and he would be casting spells ;3 maybe damage reduction magic

Child Item