NiKr wrote: » Dygz wrote: » Overall, the Active Skill deals the same amount of damage, but the tactics to combat the attack(s) would be significantly different. Also, the gear required to mitigate the damage would be significantly different. So... not big changes - it's still a Summoner. But the stuff that gets Summoned with the same Active Skill can be significantly different depending on what Augment is attached to the Active Skill. We'll just have to see what Steven has in mind when he says "significant", cause to me those changes are not significant.
Dygz wrote: » Overall, the Active Skill deals the same amount of damage, but the tactics to combat the attack(s) would be significantly different. Also, the gear required to mitigate the damage would be significantly different. So... not big changes - it's still a Summoner. But the stuff that gets Summoned with the same Active Skill can be significantly different depending on what Augment is attached to the Active Skill.
Dygz wrote: » Of course, but that is always true with you.
NiKr wrote: » Dygz wrote: » Of course, but that is always true with you. Yep Because I always want more than what's possible from games.
Azherae wrote: » Technically this is you wanting more than what is possible from reality. You're a walking semiohazard. Assuming you walk. Or define walking as a thing you do.
Noaani wrote: » It is worth noting that Steven hasn't said that every augment will drastically change the base ability, the comment is simply that the augment system has the ability to do so. This is one of the reasons I see a likelihood of people doubling down on their class more often than statistics would suggest - many people would see more value in a rush ability that works as a rush ability extremely well than they would on a rush ability that is also a detaunt (as an example).
Noaani wrote: » NiKr wrote: » I expect augments to simply make the base ability slightly better in one of the horizontal directions. We have ability ranks to achieve this. Your example for the summoner would either imply crazy stats on the solo summon or crazy small stats on the swarm. Otherwise the swarm is always better, unless its summon cd is smth like minutes-long (though even then I feel like outside of big fights with aoes, it'd still be quite op). Or - and again this is actually my expectation - the different types of summons are specific to your secondary. If you go for summoner as your secondary as a summoner, you would have a fairly solid expectation of having strong summons. If you go for a Brood Warden, you would likely expect your summons to be (specifically) a family of birds. Balance between these two would be achieved via other abilities. There is no need to specifically blance these two augments against each other, because there is no possible way for a player to be able to pick one or the other. They are picking the entier secondary class kit, and that kit determines which if these they have. Thus, if you have a summoner class that is more focused on a single summons, all augments would focus more on it and players would have more control over it. On the other hand, other summoner classes may have less of a focus on singular summons and instead offer large groups, with other augments in thst class balanced more around that notion.
NiKr wrote: » I expect augments to simply make the base ability slightly better in one of the horizontal directions.
Your example for the summoner would either imply crazy stats on the solo summon or crazy small stats on the swarm. Otherwise the swarm is always better, unless its summon cd is smth like minutes-long (though even then I feel like outside of big fights with aoes, it'd still be quite op).
Scarctic wrote: » Noaani wrote: » It is worth noting that Steven hasn't said that every augment will drastically change the base ability, the comment is simply that the augment system has the ability to do so. This is one of the reasons I see a likelihood of people doubling down on their class more often than statistics would suggest - many people would see more value in a rush ability that works as a rush ability extremely well than they would on a rush ability that is also a detaunt (as an example). Balance the gains from each augment to make them all viable. Stealth + crit-chance from Rogue, attack-speed, and root-CC from Ranger. Why do we want to mix archetypes again? To gain the beneficial effects from them. Intrepid has just to figure out what is beneficial to us in PvX and what is not enough.
Artharion wrote: » People thinking that there will be 64 totally different classes... No, the game will have 8 classes and each one will have 8 modifiers.
RazThemun wrote: » Truth be told... All they have to do is have your main Class/ Augment have a majority of your abilities. Then have each class offer 5 extra abilities in the event you pick it as a secondary. It would offer variety but it would not be so complex in thinking 64 completely different classes are needed or implemented. Oh you want to be a fighter secondary... you get more 2 handed weapon abilities, a rage mode, etc. Oh you want to be a cleric secondary.... here are 4-5 extra shield/heal abilities...
rikardp98 wrote: » Depraved wrote: » how and why would it be better? how are you measuring that? are you implying that if they build the augment system the base classes will feel incomplete? that makes no sense. building one system doesnt mean you neglect another one. In the sense that the class fantasy of the augmented archetype will feel incomplete. I feel like they should focus on the base archetype and its fantasy. Then make new classes in the future to make different feeling classes and builds to fill some other class fantasy. And I in current system, adding new archetypes will be a huge time investment and make things even more complicated and bring big balance issues if not done correct. Depraved wrote: » 1- and let me tell you that if your concern is time, money and effort, making 2-4 new classes from scratch is much more money, time and effort than changing some properties in some skills. so what you said makes no sense to me. To me it make sense since creating a new class that stands on its own will be easier than creating and balancing augmented spells that is related to every other archetype (this is only based on feeling and nothing else xD). Yes both takes time but I feel like creating and balancing 280-320 abilities for every class will take longer than creating a new class with 35-40 spells. Depraved wrote: » 2- people will stack classes regardless. if you have 10-12 classes, people will pick the strongest for the party anyways. they are balancing around having 1 of each main archetype in the party. if they added more archetypes right now, they would have to go back to the drawing board and figure out what they are going to do now with parties. thats more time, money and effort Yes people will stack classes, 100%. From what I have seen they have said that they won't balance for 1v1 and instead focus on group balance, and we have 8, 16 and 40 person groups sizes. So I dont think they only look at 8 man party with one of each archetype when balancing. And that would be weird, since most friend groups and guilds will NOT have an even spread of archetypes. So getting a group with one of each will be very very difficult for the average player.
Depraved wrote: » how and why would it be better? how are you measuring that? are you implying that if they build the augment system the base classes will feel incomplete? that makes no sense. building one system doesnt mean you neglect another one.
Depraved wrote: » 1- and let me tell you that if your concern is time, money and effort, making 2-4 new classes from scratch is much more money, time and effort than changing some properties in some skills. so what you said makes no sense to me.
Depraved wrote: » 2- people will stack classes regardless. if you have 10-12 classes, people will pick the strongest for the party anyways. they are balancing around having 1 of each main archetype in the party. if they added more archetypes right now, they would have to go back to the drawing board and figure out what they are going to do now with parties. thats more time, money and effort
willsummon wrote: » Enigmatic Sage wrote: » willsummon wrote: » Sage, I fully agree. That is how I see it. Also, the way it looks. Each class will have two roles each. Unlike in WoW where some classes could have three or four roles each. In some ways this can be more interesting as if you enjoy playing tanks, you dont need to reroll 5 different classes to try all the tank specs unless you really want to lol. Can be a paladin one month and a Guardian the next. Realistically for the alt-o-holics.. you only need to make 8 characters unless class and race is that personally significant to the player I agree. Also, it is very possible that classes that use the same two archetypes will mirror each other and be very different in how they play.
Enigmatic Sage wrote: » willsummon wrote: » Sage, I fully agree. That is how I see it. Also, the way it looks. Each class will have two roles each. Unlike in WoW where some classes could have three or four roles each. In some ways this can be more interesting as if you enjoy playing tanks, you dont need to reroll 5 different classes to try all the tank specs unless you really want to lol. Can be a paladin one month and a Guardian the next. Realistically for the alt-o-holics.. you only need to make 8 characters unless class and race is that personally significant to the player
willsummon wrote: » Sage, I fully agree. That is how I see it. Also, the way it looks. Each class will have two roles each. Unlike in WoW where some classes could have three or four roles each.
consultant wrote: » Well for pvp even small changes to class has a huge impact. For example the cleric subclas could offer a ranger cleric a self heal, which hunters normally do not have so it could help rnagers over come a weakness so that is a plus. Think a more problematic issue is the wide range of items that players are going to have access to. Which is all of them.
