Artharion wrote: » nanfoodle wrote: » Why do you just play the class you like and give feedback on how to make it better? Because I prefer hearing people's opinion, it helps me to know the state of the clases. You've jumped into the thread twice without addressing its point, and it seems like the topic bothers you. If you don’t like it, simply don’t participate. You can't control what others do, especially in a forum. I respect what you do, so please let me do what I want as long as I follow the rules. Anything that isn't related to in-game classes, please send it via private message. Let's not derail the thread. Thanks .
nanfoodle wrote: » Why do you just play the class you like and give feedback on how to make it better?
Artharion wrote: » For those who have played it, which one has higher single-target DPS?
nanfoodle wrote: » Steven has been firm, no DPS meter. He feels in pushes the game to meta builds being the only option. There will be leader boards though.
Sathrago wrote: » Torsten wrote: » nanfoodle wrote: » There will be so much balancing meta will not matter. Also there is so many ways to progress your char that the same class will play so much different from spec to spec. The options are very vast. if every class is equally balanced then there is zero reason to have multiple classes. thats silly to say because it over generalizes what "balance" is. Here are my predictions/suggestions for how it will/should be. Clerics are the best at healing and should probably be the 2nd hardest archetype to kill where tanks are the first. Both should do a similar amount of damage to each other with utility that makes them viable in any group size. Tanks are the tankiest, dealing relatively the same if not slightly more than clerics. Ranger should be great at kiting with good sustained damage and some survival tools. Mage should be the glass cannon of the ranged archetypes dealing large costly hits but have the weakest defenses, causing them to rely on allies a bit more in cases where aggro equals death. Something similar to old world of warcraft mages and nothing like the retail version of mages. they can have mobility but not as much as ranger. Fighter should be the third tankiest archetype with the 2nd highest melee damage behind rogues. they have a decent amount of aoe tools and tankiness which should feel like a sort of barbarian from dnd. Rogue should deal the most single target damage in the game with various utility and tricks to survive, engage, and disengage from encounters. their tankiness will come from their skilled control of enemies more than actual defensive cooldowns. baseline they would be a little tankier than a ranger since melee is a very scary place to be in. Bards should be slightly more damage than the cleric and tank, as their buffs and debuffs will be a collective increase on their groups damage. Since they dance between short and long range for various activities they would be on the tankier side, about the same as a ranger. Summoners should be pushed towards a middle of the pack for all respects baseline and specialization will have them push towards the role they took as a secondary. Though the summoner themselves will probably be similar to a mage in survivability, they make up for this with the pet taking most of their damage. TLDR you have three categories. Dps, Survivability, Utility. 1 is the highest 8 is lowest. DPS 1. Rogue 2. Mage 3. Fighter 4. Ranger 5. Summoner 6. Bard 7. Tank 8. Cleric SURVIVABILITY 1. Tank 2. Cleric 3. Fighter 4. Bard 5. Summoner 6. Ranger 7. Rogue 8. Mage UTILITY 1. Bard 2. Rogue 3. Tank 4. Cleric 5. Summoner 6. Ranger 7. Mage 8. Fighter Now this does not mean the ones ranked lower are extremely bad in that category, they still have tools for it, just not as much as the higher ranked ones. This also doesnt mean that there is a vast disparity between the top rank and the bottom rank. That comes down to finetuned balancing and class fantasy. But yeah this is my opinion on it either way.
Torsten wrote: » nanfoodle wrote: » There will be so much balancing meta will not matter. Also there is so many ways to progress your char that the same class will play so much different from spec to spec. The options are very vast. if every class is equally balanced then there is zero reason to have multiple classes.
nanfoodle wrote: » There will be so much balancing meta will not matter. Also there is so many ways to progress your char that the same class will play so much different from spec to spec. The options are very vast.
Githal wrote: » Do you realize that you put summoner in 5th position place in all 3 sections. Least dps, bad survivability and bad utility. In the same time you put Rogue as best dps and best utility (from dps classes). Where is the balance? Rogue should have either dmg or utility. Maybe have option to choose from the 2, but when you choose 1, you dont get the other. Also Cleric should not have survivability. He should be able to keep other targets alive, but not himself. You put Mage to have the least survivability and 7th place on utility, And is not even Best dmg? Ranger is in bad place also... But at the same time fighter gets most survivability from dps classes, and 3rd place on dps. I see Favoritism from a Rogue main player here, which is not balanced at all.
Sathrago wrote: » Githal wrote: » Do you realize that you put summoner in 5th position place in all 3 sections. Least dps, bad survivability and bad utility. In the same time you put Rogue as best dps and best utility (from dps classes). Where is the balance? Rogue should have either dmg or utility. Maybe have option to choose from the 2, but when you choose 1, you dont get the other. Also Cleric should not have survivability. He should be able to keep other targets alive, but not himself. You put Mage to have the least survivability and 7th place on utility, And is not even Best dmg? Ranger is in bad place also... But at the same time fighter gets most survivability from dps classes, and 3rd place on dps. I see Favoritism from a Rogue main player here, which is not balanced at all. Im a warlock main. through and through. in my mind rogues are slippery little monsters that do a ton of damage and have a bunch of tricks that if used well can control a fight. So I fully understand why and where I put them. Summoner is 5th literally because its described as a jack of all trades archetype. it makes sense for them to be slightly lower in all aspects baseline. This is without a secondary archetype and specialization mind you. Also, its not like I said there needs to be some sort of massive gap between the archetypes damage. it could be only a percent or two. Its hard to tell when most of the summoners damage/survivability/utility will come from a minion that will have an easier time dealing damage than say a melee archetype. To say that cleric shouldnt have survivability makes no sense. if they are the primary healer their survival will naturally be higher than most other classes. Especially if they are being designed with the intent that they are dnd/pathfinder clerics. With mage they are already a ranged class with slows and good aoes. the fact that they are 2nd on ranged and 7th on utility means that in most cases they are your best choice for raw damage output in the game. Being a ranged dps is extremely powerful and the tradeoff for this is lower values in both of the other departments. The reason why fighter is in its position is because its very clear in most games that melee archetypes have a harder time the more difficult and mobile a boss fight is. As well as in pvp. to compensate for a lack of uptime they deal more damage when they do get on a target. they are tanky because its needed for being in such a lethal fighting range. As for ranger being in a bad spot, again its not like these rankings make them terrible at their job they are just slightly lower on the scale. you are taking the ranking to mean they suck at that particular thing. All its there to say is an archetype has slightly more focus or less focus on that area. The real balance is up to the nuances in the design. Now if this still sounds bad to you, then we just dont share the same opinions on how archetypes should work. and thats ok.
BaSkA_9x2 wrote: » Paqu wrote: » Ranger is insane with the shortbow. I main cleric but man I jumped on a ranger and felt like I instantly hit level 8... it took my cleric a long time.... painfully long time Could you explain what is different between shortbow and longbow if you've tried both? Some skills benefit from longer range, so I'd imagine longbow has higher DPS. On the other hand, I imagine the shortbow has a higher rate of fire for the auto-attacks so maybe it evens out? ty in advance
Paqu wrote: » Ranger is insane with the shortbow. I main cleric but man I jumped on a ranger and felt like I instantly hit level 8... it took my cleric a long time.... painfully long time
Myosotys wrote: » Artharion wrote: » For those who have played it, which one has higher single-target DPS? I guess the ranger is number one in the strict meaning of Dps. But I hope Fighter will make the most damage per shot in melee to be able to frag in pvp.
Artharion wrote: » Myosotys wrote: » Artharion wrote: » For those who have played it, which one has higher single-target DPS? I guess the ranger is number one in the strict meaning of Dps. But I hope Fighter will make the most damage per shot in melee to be able to frag in pvp. what you mean. If tyhe ranger is the number one, how the fighter can do more DPS?
Caeryl wrote: » Artharion wrote: » Myosotys wrote: » Artharion wrote: » For those who have played it, which one has higher single-target DPS? I guess the ranger is number one in the strict meaning of Dps. But I hope Fighter will make the most damage per shot in melee to be able to frag in pvp. what you mean. If tyhe ranger is the number one, how the fighter can do more DPS? They mean ranger would have steady damage output (lower tooltips hitting more frequently), while fighter would have more sporadic burst (higher tooltips hitting less frequently). Average dps about the same, but burst is key in PvP especially in fights with strong healers on the other side.
Artharion wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Artharion wrote: » Myosotys wrote: » Artharion wrote: » For those who have played it, which one has higher single-target DPS? I guess the ranger is number one in the strict meaning of Dps. But I hope Fighter will make the most damage per shot in melee to be able to frag in pvp. what you mean. If tyhe ranger is the number one, how the fighter can do more DPS? They mean ranger would have steady damage output (lower tooltips hitting more frequently), while fighter would have more sporadic burst (higher tooltips hitting less frequently). Average dps about the same, but burst is key in PvP especially in fights with strong healers on the other side. which one has more burst, fighter o ranger?
Myosotys wrote: » Artharion wrote: » Myosotys wrote: » Artharion wrote: » For those who have played it, which one has higher single-target DPS? I guess the ranger is number one in the strict meaning of Dps. But I hope Fighter will make the most damage per shot in melee to be able to frag in pvp. what you mean. If tyhe ranger is the number one, how the fighter can do more DPS? I mean that damage is not only about dps. Melee classes usually have less dps than range bow classes but they can hit harder. And in pvp, hitting harder can be the best option because less predictable.
Caeryl wrote: » Myosotys wrote: » Artharion wrote: » Myosotys wrote: » Artharion wrote: » For those who have played it, which one has higher single-target DPS? I guess the ranger is number one in the strict meaning of Dps. But I hope Fighter will make the most damage per shot in melee to be able to frag in pvp. what you mean. If tyhe ranger is the number one, how the fighter can do more DPS? I mean that damage is not only about dps. Melee classes usually have less dps than range bow classes but they can hit harder. And in pvp, hitting harder can be the best option because less predictable. ^ Exactly, predictable damage patterns make it easy for actual humans to counteract your damage Other damage patterns would be front-loaded burst and execution scaling. In PvP, I'd place ranger as more of a chip damage kind of class.
