Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

ONLY 4 or 5 classes on release! Say it isn't so........

135

Comments

  • morfidonmorfidon BochniaPosts: 245Member
    Originally posted by drakon3
    Originally posted by Karraptathid

    RIFT went way overboard and it hurt the game IMO.  However, instead of creating new classes in  future expansions in CU, having a new spec option might be the best way forward.  Sort of the middle ground between DAoC and RIFT.  So it would be tank, caster, healer, rogue, and crafter as the five base classes with two or three specs to chose from at launch. 

    I agree with you, a middle ground between DAoC and Rift would be perfect.  I personally loved the Rift soul system.  It was all the other wow-cloned things that led me to quit the game after a couple months.  Granted, I agree they went WAY overboard and allowed all classes to be any archetype.  But I loved being able to add a dash of bard to my rogue, or a little survivability to my Cleric by adding Justicator.  Yes you eventually end up with BiS spec's for each archetype, but the soul system was awesome for people like me that love to tinker with character customization. 

    tinkering was cool, but you didn't feel at all who you are because enemies could be the same classes. Combat was bad because there was almost no interrupts. I almost didn't play rift but i made in calculator specs i would like to play for almost all type of chars lol.

  • uncletomauncletoma Santa Margherita LigurePosts: 159Member

    caster, hidden class, damage dealer.

    I hope a speeder such as mnstrel, a support heal/buff class such as friar and a "mercy-like" one.

  • binskkibinskki Bourbonnais, ILPosts: 153Member

    For me, the really key things about classes that I am excited about are these:

    1. Each realm's classes being different from any other realm's - it makes all the realms have their own character and flavor from the get-go.  Even if you have similar mechanics that have to happen to make gameplay viable, it's the unique combinations and twists on these that make the characters more interesting to play...and more interesting to go up against.  In DAoC, there were a lot of subtle things about an enemy realm's classes that you really didn't get to know until you had either spent a lot of time toe-to-toe with them in Emain, or had gone and played a few of them on another server...or both.  Having spent a lot of time thinking about it over the years, this was one of the most interesting things for me about DAoC.  It really was totally different to be a Hib or a Mid or an Alb...not just PvE zone design or armor skins or  racial makeup or the shape of your cloak, but the totally different way you had to work with your realmmates in battle.  Everything did not just look different, it *felt* different.  And that was fascinating.

    2. A commitment to really, really  good class and realm balance at release.  If the game has, say, 4 unique classes per realm at the outset, that's actually twelve flavors of toon that feel quite different from one another to play across the game as a whole  - to say nothing of any customized speccing you are able to do on each of those classes.  That's a lot of choice...even if you stick to basic varients on melee, healer , and various kinds of ranged damage archetypes.  When you start tossing in fun goodies like stealth, crowd control, speed, pets, AE, buffs and debuffs, it gets to be a hoot really fast...but ONLY if it is balanced.

    If getting that balance right with available resources means fewer total classes at the outset, that's fine with me.  When the game is balanced, but with interesting, subtle nuances to each realm that it takes a long time to completely figure out, that makes a game that you have to keep thinking about.  Which is what makes games interesting to play, at least for me.

    And, also critically,  when *gameplay *is balanced, so that the person who has time to sit through eight-hour raids five times a week can't sit there swatting lesser mortals like flies without any effort (no fun for the swattee...or, honestly, even for the swatter after the initial thrill wears thin) - then, and only then, do you get strategy.  And strategy, my friends, is what makes a game that is still fresh and engaging down the line...because it is never completely the same.  Just when you think you have it mastered, you will come up against someone else's strategy that you haven't encountered before and it will throw you for a loop. 

    When it's about strategy, not just uber gear, you are challenged to improve your own strategy to beat it.  When it's all about gear, all you are ultimately challenged to do is talk on Vent and pee in a Coke can.  And if you're a girl, you can't even do the latter. :P

    Here's to strategy. :)

  • drakon3drakon3 Liberty Lake, WAPosts: 114Member
    Originally posted by morfidon

    tinkering was cool, but you didn't feel at all who you are because enemies could be the same classes. Combat was bad because there was almost no interrupts. I almost didn't play rift but i made in calculator specs i would like to play for almost all type of chars lol.

    Absolutely, I agree 100%.  My point was simply I loved the ability to tinker with spec's and create multiple playstyles with each character by mixing and matching different souls. 

  • naezgulnaezgul Homer Glen, ILPosts: 374Member
    Originally posted by Ncrediblebulk
    4 or 5 classes could work given the right system was implemented. From what I've read you will gain skill by doing things (I.E. swinging a sword or casting spells). Thus you could have 4 base classes (+1 crafter class) and allow the player to choose what they want to do within that class making the abilities and methods of attack define what exactly class the player becomes.

    If you think of Daoc's system at launch you have 4 base classes. I was a Hib thus I'll use their classes for example. You had Guardian, Naturalist, Stalker, and Magician. Thus when a player chose Guardian they were limited to specific item set  to use until they chose their path of specialization. A hero took a beefy defensive/tank ability set (although could DPS) at the cost of range (not that any tank's ranged attacks were worth worrying about except the Armsman RR5 oh noes!), Blademasters (even though most considered meat shields) specialized in pure face melting melee DPS, and Champions attuned themselves to magic but were still granted access to melee weapons for being on a lower hip point table and being easier to crowd control.

    Thus a system similar to this could be used. You pick your class, Guardian/Naturalist/Stalker/Magician, then you are given a large choice of paths to follow. The paths you use define what kind of specific class your character becomes. So if a player chooses guardian they would most likely have access to any and all physical attack paths. This isn't to say they wouldn't have the ability to attuned themselves to magic in some way although it would be bad design if they were as powerful as a specialized Magician due to the amount of armor they might be wearing.

    Thus let's say the player chooses Guardian but wants to have the ability to use magic also. Naturally as a Guardian they are going have physical damage weapons equipped but because of their magical attunement they gain access to a path which offers abilities similar to that of the Champion Class in Daoc. The ability to do some magical direct damage along with debuffing targets or buffing themselves becomes paired with the ability to use a sword/shield or even a two handed weapon. Players aren't going to all go the same path thus you might have dual wielding Guardians who debuff their targets to make killing easier. Some players hate magic and would focus solely on stabbing the target's face. It works just as well for the other base classes. If there is CC or Speed paths make them available to at least 2 paths on different base classes. So groups aren't forced to have at least one X and one Y to be competitive. Maybe you want a Naturalist attuned to Nature magic which grants healing and buffs. Perhaps a Magician attuned to Nature magic which can summon FoF shrooms and also give the caster Lifetaps (cough cough!). Stalkers would be the same. Stealth path or trickery for wall climbing, safe fall, and such paired with a choice of Bows/Xbows/Throwing or stab you in the face or back daggers/swords/maces/axes/etc. You could even offer a way for stalkers who don't want to focus on stealth alternative paths such as music maybe and create a bard class.

    4 base classes paired with a system such as this would allow for players to basically create their own class. I'm sure there would be specific paths which would be more powerful than others but that falls on the Devs to balance correctly. MJ stated choice is going to matter thus good design would want to restrict certain combinations of Paths. Similar to how mages worked in Baldur's Gate. If you chose to specialize in Evocation spells you lost the ability to cast Enchantment spells. Classes aren't going to be mirrored but will abilities like they were in Daoc? IMO figure out the abilities you want then assign them to paths which belong to classes. Players will figure out the rest.

     

     

    Camelot had 10 or 11 classes per realm on start, don't confuse the base classes with actual classes. They got rid of them as they were pointless.

  • CernanCernan Charlotte, NCPosts: 359Member
    Originally posted by naezgul

    Dedicated crafter as a class?

    if so, this should be held off....3/4 classes ain't gonna cut it......

    we gonna bring the crafter along and distract the enemy with all the baubles he is trying to hawk?

    Why do you think 3/4 won't cut it.  DAoC had multiple paths for each class.  Spellcasters had 3 primary paths and other classes had even more options with individual weapon type specs.  Been a long time since I played but I can give some ideas:

     

    Friar - Buff/staff friar or Healer friar.  Unless you specced healing on the friar it was mostly useless.  However, they had a great group HoT if you did spec that route.  Maybe you wanted to be a primary staff friar or mostly a buffer with a little staff.  A friar could do some great DPS as well.  The Cleric was the same with healing, buffing, or smiting.  One class with completely different styles of play available. 

    Tank - Shield spec to 42 for the long duration stun or do you only take shield high enough for intercept?  Every tank had to make that decision.  Do you spec high into 1 handed or do you go all out 2hander.  The Heroes wielding polearms on Mordred were entirely scary to behold.  A tank with scary dps (granted heroes were never initially intended to wield polearms.)

    Sorc - Lifedrain/AE root spec, Dot/insta debuff spec, or Mezz/charm spec.  3 entirely different playstyles each with benefits.  Granted once debuffs no longer caused interrupts it wasn't as effective.

    Enchanter - PbAE with the heal pet or DD spec with the snare pet.  Pbae was great for keep doors or in a group that was quick with the mezzing.  The DD + snare pet could solo most classes and was entirely annnoying but fun to play.  Personally I had 50 pbae chanter, tons of fun and great for powerleveling friends on curms in the frontier.  I could get a newbie from 1-30 in almost no time at all.

     

    Those are just 4 random classes I picked with multiple options for each one.  We have no idea how many spec paths are going to be available for each class.  Remember the archers, ranged classes for each realm with lots of differences.  Midgard hunters could spec for a pet,  Hib Rangers could dual wield in melee or go more into bow, and Alb Scouts had the longest range and ability to spec shield.  Actually the archer class is a great example of how 3 bow users worked completely different in each realm.  4 or 5 classes doesn't mean 4 or 5 paths.  That doesn't mean every tank is stuck with a huge spec in shield.  Once you add realm flavor its going to look like that many more options.

  • naezgulnaezgul Homer Glen, ILPosts: 374Member
    Originally posted by Cernan
    Originally posted by naezgul

    Dedicated crafter as a class?

    if so, this should be held off....3/4 classes ain't gonna cut it......

    we gonna bring the crafter along and distract the enemy with all the baubles he is trying to hawk?

    Why do you think 3/4 won't cut it.  DAoC had multiple paths for each class.  Spellcasters had 3 primary paths and other classes had even more options with individual weapon type specs.  Been a long time since I played but I can give some ideas:

     

    Friar - Buff/staff friar or Healer friar.  Unless you specced healing on the friar it was mostly useless.  However, they had a great group HoT if you did spec that route.  Maybe you wanted to be a primary staff friar or mostly a buffer with a little staff.  A friar could do some great DPS as well.  The Cleric was the same with healing, buffing, or smiting.  One class with completely different styles of play available. 

    Tank - Shield spec to 42 for the long duration stun or do you only take shield high enough for intercept?  Every tank had to make that decision.  Do you spec high into 1 handed or do you go all out 2hander.  The Heroes wielding polearms on Mordred were entirely scary to behold.  A tank with scary dps (granted heroes were never initially intended to wield polearms.)

    Sorc - Lifedrain/AE root spec, Dot/insta debuff spec, or Mezz/charm spec.  3 entirely different playstyles each with benefits.  Granted once debuffs no longer caused interrupts it wasn't as effective.

    Enchanter - PbAE with the heal pet or DD spec with the snare pet.  Pbae was great for keep doors or in a group that was quick with the mezzing.  The DD + snare pet could solo most classes and was entirely annnoying but fun to play.  Personally I had 50 pbae chanter, tons of fun and great for powerleveling friends on curms in the frontier.  I could get a newbie from 1-30 in almost no time at all.

     

    Those are just 4 random classes I picked with multiple options for each one.  We have no idea how many spec paths are going to be available for each class.  Remember the archers, ranged classes for each realm with lots of differences.  Midgard hunters could spec for a pet,  Hib Rangers could dual wield in melee or go more into bow, and Alb Scouts had the longest range and ability to spec shield.  Actually the archer class is a great example of how 3 bow users worked completely different in each realm.  4 or 5 classes doesn't mean 4 or 5 paths.  That doesn't mean every tank is stuck with a huge spec in shield.  Once you add realm flavor its going to look like that many more options.

    Multiple paths?   A class was a class. They started with 30+ classes.  Don't confuse weapon/spell lines with classes?

  • CernanCernan Charlotte, NCPosts: 359Member
    Originally posted by naezgul
    Multiple paths?   A class was a class. They started with 30+ classes.  Don't confuse weapon/spell lines with classes?

     

    Who said I was confusing the two?  You said 4/5 classes wouldn't cut it.  I'm saying 4/5 classes doesn't mean 4/5 styles of play.  One class can have multiple styles of play depending on spec paths available.  Guess you didn't understand the point of my post.  I tried to give examples of how ONE class can be played in entirely different ways.  So just because you have one class, doesn't mean it's only one style of play.  Someone else previously asked if tanks could be viable DPS.  2handed Heroes in Hibernia were viable dps, especially on Mordred with polearms.  I gave specific examples.

     

    Also lets look at your scenario you just gave with 30+ classes at launch.  So you are considering  each realm's class as individuals.  If you are going to do that then you can't say 4/5 classes won't cut it.  You are contradicting yourself.  Gotta multiply that number by 3.  I'm just using your own logic. Then we have 12-15 classes for CU, not 4/5.  

  • naezgulnaezgul Homer Glen, ILPosts: 374Member
    Originally posted by Cernan
    Originally posted by naezgul
    Multiple paths?   A class was a class. They started with 30+ classes.  Don't confuse weapon/spell lines with classes?

     

    Who said I was confusing the two?  You said 4/5 classes wouldn't cut it.  I'm saying 4/5 classes doesn't mean 4/5 styles of play.  One class can have multiple styles of play depending on spec paths available.  Guess you didn't understand the point of my post.  I tried to give examples of how ONE class can be played in entirely different ways.  So just because you have one class, doesn't mean it's only one style of play.  Someone else previously asked if tanks could be viable DPS.  2handed Heroes in Hibernia were viable dps, especially on Mordred with polearms.  I gave specific examples.

     

    Also lets look at your scenario you just gave with 30+ classes at launch.  So you are considering  each realm's class as individuals.  If you are going to do that then you can't say 4/5 classes won't cut it.  You are contradicting yourself.  Gotta multiply that number by 3.  I'm just using your own logic. Then we have 12-15 classes for CU, not 4/5.  

    Ok by that token daoc had 100 classes on launch.

    i understand what you are saying....I still believe 3 or 4, even 5 classes are not enough to bring back the DYNAMICS and feeling we had with daoc

    in theory one class is enough with enough lines/branches to choose from. To me it's symantics

  • NcrediblebulkNcrediblebulk San Marcos, TXPosts: 137Member
    Originally posted by naezgul
    Originally posted by Ncrediblebulk
    4 or 5 classes could work given the right system was implemented. From what I've read you will gain skill by doing things (I.E. swinging a sword or casting spells). Thus you could have 4 base classes (+1 crafter class) and allow the player to choose what they want to do within that class making the abilities and methods of attack define what exactly class the player becomes.

    If you think of Daoc's system at launch you have 4 base classes. I was a Hib thus I'll use their classes for example. You had Guardian, Naturalist, Stalker, and Magician. Thus when a player chose Guardian they were limited to specific item set  to use until they chose their path of specialization. A hero took a beefy defensive/tank ability set (although could DPS) at the cost of range (not that any tank's ranged attacks were worth worrying about except the Armsman RR5 oh noes!), Blademasters (even though most considered meat shields) specialized in pure face melting melee DPS, and Champions attuned themselves to magic but were still granted access to melee weapons for being on a lower hip point table and being easier to crowd control.

    Thus a system similar to this could be used. You pick your class, Guardian/Naturalist/Stalker/Magician, then you are given a large choice of paths to follow. The paths you use define what kind of specific class your character becomes. So if a player chooses guardian they would most likely have access to any and all physical attack paths. This isn't to say they wouldn't have the ability to attuned themselves to magic in some way although it would be bad design if they were as powerful as a specialized Magician due to the amount of armor they might be wearing.

    Thus let's say the player chooses Guardian but wants to have the ability to use magic also. Naturally as a Guardian they are going have physical damage weapons equipped but because of their magical attunement they gain access to a path which offers abilities similar to that of the Champion Class in Daoc. The ability to do some magical direct damage along with debuffing targets or buffing themselves becomes paired with the ability to use a sword/shield or even a two handed weapon. Players aren't going to all go the same path thus you might have dual wielding Guardians who debuff their targets to make killing easier. Some players hate magic and would focus solely on stabbing the target's face. It works just as well for the other base classes. If there is CC or Speed paths make them available to at least 2 paths on different base classes. So groups aren't forced to have at least one X and one Y to be competitive. Maybe you want a Naturalist attuned to Nature magic which grants healing and buffs. Perhaps a Magician attuned to Nature magic which can summon FoF shrooms and also give the caster Lifetaps (cough cough!). Stalkers would be the same. Stealth path or trickery for wall climbing, safe fall, and such paired with a choice of Bows/Xbows/Throwing or stab you in the face or back daggers/swords/maces/axes/etc. You could even offer a way for stalkers who don't want to focus on stealth alternative paths such as music maybe and create a bard class.

    4 base classes paired with a system such as this would allow for players to basically create their own class. I'm sure there would be specific paths which would be more powerful than others but that falls on the Devs to balance correctly. MJ stated choice is going to matter thus good design would want to restrict certain combinations of Paths. Similar to how mages worked in Baldur's Gate. If you chose to specialize in Evocation spells you lost the ability to cast Enchantment spells. Classes aren't going to be mirrored but will abilities like they were in Daoc? IMO figure out the abilities you want then assign them to paths which belong to classes. Players will figure out the rest.

     

     

    Camelot had 10 or 11 classes per realm on start, don't confuse the base classes with actual classes. They got rid of them as they were pointless.

    You are right the base classes in Daoc weren't important and thus were done away with. I'm not confusing them with the actual classes merely stating you remained a guardian, even though your class name changed, when you chose to become a champion but because of this choice you gained the ability to use magic and lost the abilitiy to use spears and DW. You also were put onto a different HP and CC immunity table. There's no reason CU couldn't launch like this from what MJ has said in the foundation principles. Have 4 base combat classes and 1 crafter class. Players who pick a combat class then choose what set of skills they want to use. Some skills would be general guardian skills with others would restrict access to others so you don't end up with over powered combinations. It's a give and take system which takes 4 base classes and allows for choice to matter (which MJ also talked about in a foundation principle). This allows you to design basic base classes and put more focus on the abilities which each specialization path within that base class has access to. This is what made the classes different in Daoc. A pally had a bunch of chants (endo, helath, power regens, armor buff, etc.) making him a more defesne class while a champion's ability set was way more offensive with a self buff, DD, debuffs, and a snare.

     

    I wasn't suggesting every realm start with the same base classes. You would end up having different base classes like you did in Daoc. They would be different due to a specific sets of abilities they had access too (2h in alb, LW/Spear in Hib, ability to use 1h and 2h weapon type by specing a path in mid) paired with perhaps some general ones (named differently for each realm but with less variation like mending/nuture/rejuvenation).  Maybe the TDD's guardian magic path was all about debuffs with some light damage while the Viking's guardian magic path showcased the ability to buff yourself and your ally's. This makes the classes unmirrored by what abilities they have access to which is how it was in Daoc. Champions, Valewalkers, Skalds, Thanes, Reavers, and Pallys were all branches of the tank class that chose magic attunement as a specific set of skills but even in that choice there was vast difference in the abilities choosing this magic attunement granted them. This lead to different playstyle of classes as illustrated by the Pally/Champion example above.

    "Rather than love, than money, than fame, give me truth."

  • naezgulnaezgul Homer Glen, ILPosts: 374Member
    Originally posted by Ncrediblebulk
    Originally posted by naezgul
    Originally posted by Ncrediblebulk
    4 or 5 classes could work given the right system was implemented. From what I've read you will gain skill by doing things (I.E. swinging a sword or casting spells). Thus you could have 4 base classes (+1 crafter class) and allow the player to choose what they want to do within that class making the abilities and methods of attack define what exactly class the player becomes.

    If you think of Daoc's system at launch you have 4 base classes. I was a Hib thus I'll use their classes for example. You had Guardian, Naturalist, Stalker, and Magician. Thus when a player chose Guardian they were limited to specific item set  to use until they chose their path of specialization. A hero took a beefy defensive/tank ability set (although could DPS) at the cost of range (not that any tank's ranged attacks were worth worrying about except the Armsman RR5 oh noes!), Blademasters (even though most considered meat shields) specialized in pure face melting melee DPS, and Champions attuned themselves to magic but were still granted access to melee weapons for being on a lower hip point table and being easier to crowd control.

    Thus a system similar to this could be used. You pick your class, Guardian/Naturalist/Stalker/Magician, then you are given a large choice of paths to follow. The paths you use define what kind of specific class your character becomes. So if a player chooses guardian they would most likely have access to any and all physical attack paths. This isn't to say they wouldn't have the ability to attuned themselves to magic in some way although it would be bad design if they were as powerful as a specialized Magician due to the amount of armor they might be wearing.

    Thus let's say the player chooses Guardian but wants to have the ability to use magic also. Naturally as a Guardian they are going have physical damage weapons equipped but because of their magical attunement they gain access to a path which offers abilities similar to that of the Champion Class in Daoc. The ability to do some magical direct damage along with debuffing targets or buffing themselves becomes paired with the ability to use a sword/shield or even a two handed weapon. Players aren't going to all go the same path thus you might have dual wielding Guardians who debuff their targets to make killing easier. Some players hate magic and would focus solely on stabbing the target's face. It works just as well for the other base classes. If there is CC or Speed paths make them available to at least 2 paths on different base classes. So groups aren't forced to have at least one X and one Y to be competitive. Maybe you want a Naturalist attuned to Nature magic which grants healing and buffs. Perhaps a Magician attuned to Nature magic which can summon FoF shrooms and also give the caster Lifetaps (cough cough!). Stalkers would be the same. Stealth path or trickery for wall climbing, safe fall, and such paired with a choice of Bows/Xbows/Throwing or stab you in the face or back daggers/swords/maces/axes/etc. You could even offer a way for stalkers who don't want to focus on stealth alternative paths such as music maybe and create a bard class.

    4 base classes paired with a system such as this would allow for players to basically create their own class. I'm sure there would be specific paths which would be more powerful than others but that falls on the Devs to balance correctly. MJ stated choice is going to matter thus good design would want to restrict certain combinations of Paths. Similar to how mages worked in Baldur's Gate. If you chose to specialize in Evocation spells you lost the ability to cast Enchantment spells. Classes aren't going to be mirrored but will abilities like they were in Daoc? IMO figure out the abilities you want then assign them to paths which belong to classes. Players will figure out the rest.

     

     

    Camelot had 10 or 11 classes per realm on start, don't confuse the base classes with actual classes. They got rid of them as they were pointless.

    You are right the base classes in Daoc weren't important and thus were done away with. I'm not confusing them with the actual classes merely stating you remained a guardian, even though your class name changed, when you chose to become a champion but because of this choice you gained the ability to use magic and lost the abilitiy to use spears and DW. You also were put onto a different HP and CC immunity table. There's no reason CU couldn't launch like this from what MJ has said in the foundation principles. Have 4 base combat classes and 1 crafter class. Players who pick a combat class then choose what set of skills they want to use. Some skills would be general guardian skills with others would restrict access to others so you don't end up with over powered combinations. It's a give and take system which takes 4 base classes and allows for choice to matter (which MJ also talked about in a foundation principle). This allows you to design basic base classes and put more focus on the abilities which each specialization path within that base class has access to. This is what made the classes different in Daoc. A pally had a bunch of chants (endo, helath, power regens, armor buff, etc.) making him a more defesne class while a champion's ability set was way more offensive with a self buff, DD, debuffs, and a snare.

     

    I wasn't suggesting every realm start with the same base classes. You would end up having different base classes like you did in Daoc. They would be different due to a specific sets of abilities they had access too (2h in alb, LW/Spear in Hib, ability to use 1h and 2h weapon type by specing a path in mid) paired with perhaps some general ones (named differently for each realm but with less variation like mending/nuture/rejuvenation).  Maybe the TDD's guardian magic path was all about debuffs with some light damage while the Viking's guardian magic path showcased the ability to buff yourself and your ally's. This makes the classes unmirrored by what abilities they have access to which is how it was in Daoc. Champions, Valewalkers, Skalds, Thanes, Reavers, and Pallys were all branches of the tank class that chose magic attunement as a specific set of skills but even in that choice there was vast difference in the abilities choosing this magic attunement granted them. This lead to different playstyle of classes as illustrated by the Pally/Champion example above.

    The base classes are pointless. You knew what you were going to create on startup. It's just time wasted coding that isn't needed.

    the base class was used for what? Ten or fifteen minutes of play? Before  you go on to your actual class?

    it would be a different story if you had a base class for twenty levels and that path actually influenced your final class choice

  • CernanCernan Charlotte, NCPosts: 359Member
    Originally posted by naezgul
     

    Ok by that token daoc had 100 classes on launch.

    i understand what you are saying....I still believe 3 or 4, even 5 classes are not enough to bring back the DYNAMICS and feeling we had with daoc

    in theory one class is enough with enough lines/branches to choose from. To me it's symantics

    It's still 4 or 5 per realm,  not in total.  So they are having to come up with 12-15 unique classes to balance.  That is why they are trying to keep the numbers low per realm at start.  Some games launch with only 5 classes total these days.  You are still getting 12-15 total classes, it's just split between factions.  Roll a different server and choose another realm for variety.

    A Scout, Ranger, and Hunter have entirely different mechanics.  Not that they will have those classes, just giving a DAoC example.  It's still  just one Archer class.  However, realm flavor gives each class different specializtion paths to pick from.  Only the hunter can tame pets, only the ranger can dual wield, and only the scout can stun for 9 seconds with his shield.  That may seem like 1 class, but in balance terms they 3 to deal with in this scenario.  Same with the bolt casters.  Only runemasters had  group bladeturn.  Only wizards could cast 3 bolts.

  • NcrediblebulkNcrediblebulk San Marcos, TXPosts: 137Member
    Originally posted by naezgul
    Originally posted by Cernan
    Originally posted by naezgul
    Multiple paths?   A class was a class. They started with 30+ classes.  Don't confuse weapon/spell lines with classes?

     

    Who said I was confusing the two?  You said 4/5 classes wouldn't cut it.  I'm saying 4/5 classes doesn't mean 4/5 styles of play.  One class can have multiple styles of play depending on spec paths available.  Guess you didn't understand the point of my post.  I tried to give examples of how ONE class can be played in entirely different ways.  So just because you have one class, doesn't mean it's only one style of play.  Someone else previously asked if tanks could be viable DPS.  2handed Heroes in Hibernia were viable dps, especially on Mordred with polearms.  I gave specific examples.

     

    Also lets look at your scenario you just gave with 30+ classes at launch.  So you are considering  each realm's class as individuals.  If you are going to do that then you can't say 4/5 classes won't cut it.  You are contradicting yourself.  Gotta multiply that number by 3.  I'm just using your own logic. Then we have 12-15 classes for CU, not 4/5.  

    Ok by that token daoc had 100 classes on launch.

    i understand what you are saying....I still believe 3 or 4, even 5 classes are not enough to bring back the DYNAMICS and feeling we had with daoc

    in theory one class is enough with enough lines/branches to choose from. To me it's symantics

    I think it is merely being stated there were 4 basic classes and based on the set of abilities you chose to specialize in you were granted different playstyles.. Based on what set of abilities you chose to have access to your playstyles were often narrowed down to 3 or sometimes 2 depending on the class. To me it seems he realizes there were a bunch of classes at launch all with different names, however they still were grouped into 4 base classes. The sets of abilites is what gave them the different playstyles and what set them apart from not only other classes within your realm but across the other two. A Wizard and a Sorc were both Magician base class at the base of the design, just the set of abilities and playstyles each specific class had was different. CU can launch with 4 base combat classes (Guardian, Naturalist, Magician, Stalker) for each realm named differently and end up actually having 12-15 classes per realm based on what set of abilities the player has access to depending on what realm and base class they chose.

     

    Edit: To me it seems you are merely arguing the naming of 4 base classes isnt' enough. It's basically the same system as Daoc with only removing the fact that when you chose Sorc abilities as a Magician your class named changed to Sorc, even though at the base of the design you were merely a Magician who has chosen Sorc abilities.

    "Rather than love, than money, than fame, give me truth."

  • naezgulnaezgul Homer Glen, ILPosts: 374Member
    Originally posted by Ncrediblebulk
    Originally posted by naezgul
    Originally posted by Cernan
    Originally posted by naezgul
    Multiple paths?   A class was a class. They started with 30+ classes.  Don't confuse weapon/spell lines with classes?

     

    Who said I was confusing the two?  You said 4/5 classes wouldn't cut it.  I'm saying 4/5 classes doesn't mean 4/5 styles of play.  One class can have multiple styles of play depending on spec paths available.  Guess you didn't understand the point of my post.  I tried to give examples of how ONE class can be played in entirely different ways.  So just because you have one class, doesn't mean it's only one style of play.  Someone else previously asked if tanks could be viable DPS.  2handed Heroes in Hibernia were viable dps, especially on Mordred with polearms.  I gave specific examples.

     

    Also lets look at your scenario you just gave with 30+ classes at launch.  So you are considering  each realm's class as individuals.  If you are going to do that then you can't say 4/5 classes won't cut it.  You are contradicting yourself.  Gotta multiply that number by 3.  I'm just using your own logic. Then we have 12-15 classes for CU, not 4/5.  

    Ok by that token daoc had 100 classes on launch.

    i understand what you are saying....I still believe 3 or 4, even 5 classes are not enough to bring back the DYNAMICS and feeling we had with daoc

    in theory one class is enough with enough lines/branches to choose from. To me it's symantics

    I think it is merely being stated there were 4 basic classes and based on the set of abilities you chose to specialize in you were granted different playstyles.. Based on what set of abilities you chose to have access to your playstyles were often narrowed down to 3 or sometimes 2 depending on the class. To me it seems he realizes there were a bunch of classes at launch all with different names, however they still were grouped into 4 base classes. The sets of abilites is what gave them the different playstyles and what set them apart from not only other classes within your realm but across the other two. A Wizard and a Sorc were both Magician base class at the base of the design, just the set of abilities and playstyles each specific class had was different. CU can launch with 4 base combat classes (Guardian, Naturalist, Magician, Stalker) for each realm named differently and end up actually having 12-15 classes per realm based on what set of abilities the player has access to depending on what realm and base class they chose.

     

    Edit: To me it seems you are merely arguing the naming of 4 base classes isnt' enough. It's basically the same system as Daoc with only removing the fact that when you chose Sorc abilities as a Magician your class named changed to Sorc, even though at the base of the design you were merely a Magician who has chosen Sorc abilities.

    A wizard and a sorcerer were COMPLETELY Different  

    you cannot even come close to saying they filled the same niche, or playstyle

    my point is 4 or 5 classes will not give the same DYNAMICS OR SYNERGY working together than you can have with the plethora of designs available with what daoc has

    Q: would you rather have two wizards running together or a wizard and a sorcerer?

     

  • NcrediblebulkNcrediblebulk San Marcos, TXPosts: 137Member
    Originally posted by naezgul
    Originally posted by Ncrediblebulk
    Originally posted by naezgul
    Originally posted by Cernan
    Originally posted by naezgul
    Multiple paths?   A class was a class. They started with 30+ classes.  Don't confuse weapon/spell lines with classes?

     

    Who said I was confusing the two?  You said 4/5 classes wouldn't cut it.  I'm saying 4/5 classes doesn't mean 4/5 styles of play.  One class can have multiple styles of play depending on spec paths available.  Guess you didn't understand the point of my post.  I tried to give examples of how ONE class can be played in entirely different ways.  So just because you have one class, doesn't mean it's only one style of play.  Someone else previously asked if tanks could be viable DPS.  2handed Heroes in Hibernia were viable dps, especially on Mordred with polearms.  I gave specific examples.

     

    Also lets look at your scenario you just gave with 30+ classes at launch.  So you are considering  each realm's class as individuals.  If you are going to do that then you can't say 4/5 classes won't cut it.  You are contradicting yourself.  Gotta multiply that number by 3.  I'm just using your own logic. Then we have 12-15 classes for CU, not 4/5.  

    Ok by that token daoc had 100 classes on launch.

    i understand what you are saying....I still believe 3 or 4, even 5 classes are not enough to bring back the DYNAMICS and feeling we had with daoc

    in theory one class is enough with enough lines/branches to choose from. To me it's symantics

    I think it is merely being stated there were 4 basic classes and based on the set of abilities you chose to specialize in you were granted different playstyles.. Based on what set of abilities you chose to have access to your playstyles were often narrowed down to 3 or sometimes 2 depending on the class. To me it seems he realizes there were a bunch of classes at launch all with different names, however they still were grouped into 4 base classes. The sets of abilites is what gave them the different playstyles and what set them apart from not only other classes within your realm but across the other two. A Wizard and a Sorc were both Magician base class at the base of the design, just the set of abilities and playstyles each specific class had was different. CU can launch with 4 base combat classes (Guardian, Naturalist, Magician, Stalker) for each realm named differently and end up actually having 12-15 classes per realm based on what set of abilities the player has access to depending on what realm and base class they chose.

     

    Edit: To me it seems you are merely arguing the naming of 4 base classes isnt' enough. It's basically the same system as Daoc with only removing the fact that when you chose Sorc abilities as a Magician your class named changed to Sorc, even though at the base of the design you were merely a Magician who has chosen Sorc abilities.

    A wizard and a sorcerer were COMPLETELY Different  

    you cannot even come close to saying they filled the same niche, or playstyle

    my point is 4 or 5 classes will not give the same DYNAMICS OR SYNERGY working together than you can have with the plethora of designs available with what daoc has

    Q: would you rather have two wizards running together or a wizard and a sorcerer?

     

    I said they were different. I was only comparing them on the same base level because they both wore cloth, had to stand still while casting, and had zero physical ability but focused on magic. This made them both mages which is a general base class. Choosing the Sorc class or Wizard class wasn't what made the classes different it was the vastly different ability sets (Mez/LT/etc. for the sorc and Pbaoe/DDsnare/DD for the wizard) the devs assigned to them. These differenet grouping of abilities across all three realms is what made the classes unmirrored. You can still have 4 base classes at launch with generic names and not worry about coming up with sub class names as long as you differentiate what ability sets each base class has access to. Basically you stay your base class but still choose what specific group of abilities you want access to thus giving a deep class system like Daoc's without specific sub class names tied to the group of abilities you chose. Thus negating your argument that having only 4 or 5 classes wouldn't offer the chance for Dynamics or Synergy if the 4 or 5 classes all have abilities which are grouped together differently but spread across the entire realm class wise so there remains some balance.

     

    As far as a Wiz/Sorc or Wiz/Wiz: What are we doing? 2 man roaming team? Wiz/Sorc would be easier with speed and mez but Wiz/Wiz wouldn't be horrible because of DD/snare.

    "Rather than love, than money, than fame, give me truth."

  • naezgulnaezgul Homer Glen, ILPosts: 374Member
    Originally posted by Ncrediblebulk
    Originally posted by naezgul
    Originally posted by Ncrediblebulk
    Originally posted by naezgul
    Originally posted by Cernan
    Originally posted by naezgul
    Multiple paths?   A class was a class. They started with 30+ classes.  Don't confuse weapon/spell lines with classes?

     

    Who said I was confusing the two?  You said 4/5 classes wouldn't cut it.  I'm saying 4/5 classes doesn't mean 4/5 styles of play.  One class can have multiple styles of play depending on spec paths available.  Guess you didn't understand the point of my post.  I tried to give examples of how ONE class can be played in entirely different ways.  So just because you have one class, doesn't mean it's only one style of play.  Someone else previously asked if tanks could be viable DPS.  2handed Heroes in Hibernia were viable dps, especially on Mordred with polearms.  I gave specific examples.

     

    Also lets look at your scenario you just gave with 30+ classes at launch.  So you are considering  each realm's class as individuals.  If you are going to do that then you can't say 4/5 classes won't cut it.  You are contradicting yourself.  Gotta multiply that number by 3.  I'm just using your own logic. Then we have 12-15 classes for CU, not 4/5.  

    Ok by that token daoc had 100 classes on launch.

    i understand what you are saying....I still believe 3 or 4, even 5 classes are not enough to bring back the DYNAMICS and feeling we had with daoc

    in theory one class is enough with enough lines/branches to choose from. To me it's symantics

    I think it is merely being stated there were 4 basic classes and based on the set of abilities you chose to specialize in you were granted different playstyles.. Based on what set of abilities you chose to have access to your playstyles were often narrowed down to 3 or sometimes 2 depending on the class. To me it seems he realizes there were a bunch of classes at launch all with different names, however they still were grouped into 4 base classes. The sets of abilites is what gave them the different playstyles and what set them apart from not only other classes within your realm but across the other two. A Wizard and a Sorc were both Magician base class at the base of the design, just the set of abilities and playstyles each specific class had was different. CU can launch with 4 base combat classes (Guardian, Naturalist, Magician, Stalker) for each realm named differently and end up actually having 12-15 classes per realm based on what set of abilities the player has access to depending on what realm and base class they chose.

     

    Edit: To me it seems you are merely arguing the naming of 4 base classes isnt' enough. It's basically the same system as Daoc with only removing the fact that when you chose Sorc abilities as a Magician your class named changed to Sorc, even though at the base of the design you were merely a Magician who has chosen Sorc abilities.

    A wizard and a sorcerer were COMPLETELY Different  

    you cannot even come close to saying they filled the same niche, or playstyle

    my point is 4 or 5 classes will not give the same DYNAMICS OR SYNERGY working together than you can have with the plethora of designs available with what daoc has

    Q: would you rather have two wizards running together or a wizard and a sorcerer?

     

    I said they were different. I was only comparing them on the same base level because they both wore cloth, had to stand still while casting, and had zero physical ability but focused on magic. This made them both mages which is a general base class. Choosing the Sorc class or Wizard class wasn't what made the classes different it was the vastly different ability sets (Mez/LT/etc. for the sorc and Pbaoe/DDsnare/DD for the wizard) the devs assigned to them. These differenet grouping of abilities across all three realms is what made the classes unmirrored. You can still have 4 base classes at launch with generic names and not worry about coming up with sub class names as long as you differentiate what ability sets each base class has access to. Basically you stay your base class but still choose what specific group of abilities you want access to thus giving a deep class system like Daoc's without specific sub class names tied to the group of abilities you chose. Thus negating your argument that having only 4 or 5 classes wouldn't offer the chance for Dynamics or Synergy if the 4 or 5 classes all have abilities which are grouped together differently but spread across the entire realm class wise so there remains some balance.

     

    As far as a Wiz/Sorc or Wiz/Wiz: What are we doing? 2 man roaming team? Wiz/Sorc would be easier with speed and mez but Wiz/Wiz wouldn't be horrible because of DD/snare.

    Let me get this straight, you actually think MJ is talking about 4 or 5 base classes that could be "specced" to be the equivalent of 12 or 15 daoc type classes?

    because thats not what I took it for at all, hence my worries that their will not be enough choices for good play......or worse the classes are all so jackofalltrades that we have the garbage we see in GW2.

  • NcrediblebulkNcrediblebulk San Marcos, TXPosts: 137Member
    Originally posted by naezgul
    Originally posted by Ncrediblebulk
    Originally posted by naezgul
    Originally posted by Ncrediblebulk
    Originally posted by naezgul
    Originally posted by Cernan
    Originally posted by naezgul

    Let me get this straight, you actually think MJ is talking about 4 or 5 base classes that could be "specced" to be the equivalent of 12 or 15 daoc type classes?

    because thats not what I took it for at all, hence my worries that their will not be enough choices for good play......or worse the classes are all so jackofalltrades that we have the garbage we see in GW2.

    I have no idea what he is thinking because we have so little information thus far. I am merely trying to illustrate you can launch with 4 base combat classes per realm all with access to their own different set of abilities to create diversity between the realm base classes. Figure out the larger group of all abilities you want to spread across all the classes together (I.E. every realm needs access to X endo regens, X mezzes, X  etc.) and create different groupings of those abilities that syngerize with each other based on what base class they will be applied to.

    We know from Foundation Principle #4 "we also want to give the player a lot of freedom to choose skills, armor, etc. for their character without worrying about a never-ending list of absolute restrictions regarding who can wear what armor, use what weapon, etc." This makes me think of a Skyrim like system where you spend points into what you want and basically make your own class. This may be the system they use but what I've proposed is some what of a middle ground between Skyrim and Daoc.

    You pick a base class. Then pick your what path/spec you want to focus on granting you a group of abilities to use based on how much you invent in that path/spec just like in Daoc. It's Daoc because you have paths/specs to place points into granting you your abilities but the Skyrim part comes in with allowing for a more general combination of abilities. Using TDD as my realm (i'll bring it the other realm equivalents later in the post):

    I choose to be a guardian (or what ever name they choose) base class. This class is meant to use mostly melee during battle. Thus when I choose guardian paths/spec healing or deep ranged damage casting become unavailable because we wouldn't want someone in plate standing and tossing fireballs doing top DPS (or would we?). Thus I'm presented with possible path/spec choices. Lets say I have the choice of a main physical attack method and then a secondary support path/spec. So using Daoc as a reference I would be able to pick my preferred attack weapon (Blades, Blunt, Piercing, Spear, Large Weapons, Dual Wielding, and Shield). I have 2 hands so I feel it goes without saying if I were to pick just a 1 handed weapon I'd pair it with another 1 handed weapon or a shield. I pick Large weapons so I can lead the DPS train.

    Now that I have my main form of attack I can choose my secondary path/spec. Maybe another preferred weapon? Maybe because I'm TDD I can attune myself to magic and pick from a few different magic paths? Maybe I can excel in physical expertise and gain abilities like Daoc's Charge or Stoicism? Let's say my choices for secondary paths/specs are limited to just a secondary attack method and there's actually a third path/spec choice which deals with magic and physical prowess. I choose Dual wielding Blades as my secondary attack method. I want to always be able to melt faces using what ever I can find.

    So finally I get to my third path/spec choice. Maybe my choices are Nature magic, Dark Magic, Physical Feats, and Light magic. Nature magic may be designed around buffing one's allys along with themselves via chants while dark magic might be scattered with DDs and debuffs. Physical feats would cover those who have little interest in magic and want to excel at battle giving them CC reduction, Charge, Climb walls, etc. Light magic can be similar to a Warden perhaps. Light heals and buffs. I want to return to the greatness that was the Champion class so I pick Dark Magic.

    Now from these three paths I would be granted abilities which relate to the chosen paths. Large weapons my have physical attacks which stun and stagger targets while DW might be more focused on keeping the target bleeding to maximize DPS. Dark Magic abilities would be focused towards debuffing and damaging my target. I remain a guardian but have basically created my own custon class based on the paths/specs I chose. Not everyone is going to make the same choice and if designed right (they are big on Rock Paper Scissors) you could have it on a path/spec level also. Maybe DW halves the chance to block with a shield while the shield blocks Large weapons effectively but DW can't defend themselves as well against Large weapons because of the weight. Thus you have DW being more effective against shield, shield being more effective against Large Weapons, and Large Weapons being more effective against DW. This doesn't even cover armor preferences and other systems we often overlook but I'm trying to keep it simple so it's understandable.

    The other realms equivalent base classes would work the same way just have different paths/specs which would offer totally different ability sets and playstyles. So maybe a Aurthrian fighter can choose from Two handed weapons, Swords, Maces, Hatches, etc. for physical but have different options for magic attunement. Maybe Fire, Cold, Air magic along with a physical feat path named differently with a different ability set. They would choose 3 or what ever number the Devs decide The same system for a Viking viking base class.

    You can even name the physical attack paths the same you just have to have the actually attack abilities act differently. Best example of this is the style differences in the lines of a Warrior and Thane. They both have access to Sword/Hammer/Axe ability paths but then Thanes abilities and styles are different because some have DDs or debuffs attached to them.

    The main difference between this system is in place of being a base class then choosing a more specific class with the paths/specs already grouped you discard the choice of a specialized class and just choose the paths/specs yourself. This allows for their to be a deep system where players make choices to differ their classes but you end up only having to have 4 base classes. You develop a set of abilities you want to have in the game. Then group them differently making sure every realm has access to every ability. The abilities just come in different paths much like main CC in Daoc did (Sorc/Alb, Healer/Mid, Bard/Hib). When you start granting realms abilities the other one or two don't have you can get major balance issues. However it allows for a set amount of path/spec pairings which basically create specialized classes without having to actually create the specialized classes.

    I can see how this would be GW 2 like but I think the biggest difference is going to be the amount of abilities offered. GW 2 classes to me seemed watered down because you only had 5 weapon attacks (10 if you switched weapons) paired with 5 support skills. I like having a plethora of abilities at my disposal and not a finite amount especially when it's that small.

    "Rather than love, than money, than fame, give me truth."

  • redcappredcapp brook, NYPosts: 722Member
    4 or 5 classes = not playing
  • binskkibinskki Bourbonnais, ILPosts: 153Member

    I believe that all MJ has said so far is that :

    1. there will be a fairly small number of classes on release, that he hopes will be added to if the game continues

    2. he believes good balance to be a key component of the game

    3. he wants classes to be different in each realm; he feels that class mirroring across realms makes for a much less interesting game.

    However, I have been reading so many things on so many threads I would have to go back through the Founding Principles and some of the interviews I have bookmarked to remember where the heck I heard what.  Please correct me if I am wrong, someone. :)

  • bcbullybcbully Westland, MIPosts: 8,277Member Uncommon
  • TimothyTierlessTimothyTierless Columnist M, ORPosts: 2,163Member Uncommon

    We all know mj loves lots of classes, we all know he loves alting, we all know his other games had many classes, and we all know cu can always add more, soooooooo chill.

  • skyexileskyexile MelbournePosts: 692Member

    Given that there could be a great range of ways to spec and gear them, i dont think having only 5 is a problem.

    SKYeXile
    TRF - GM - GW2, PS2, WAR, AION, Rift, WoW, WOT....etc...
    Future Crew - High Council. Planetside 1 & 2.

  • SpellforgedSpellforged Belvidere, ILPosts: 458Member
    What's bad about 4 or 5 classes? That just sounds like the standard Warrior/Archer/Rogue/Mage/Cleric combination to me.

    image
  • NcrediblebulkNcrediblebulk San Marcos, TXPosts: 137Member
    Originally posted by Ujirik
    What's bad about 4 or 5 classes? That just sounds like the standard Warrior/Archer/Rogue/Mage/Cleric combination to me.

    We know they won't be mirrored so it turns into 12-15 different classes given each realm has the same amount of classes to choose from and that number can increase even more based on the different ability sets each class has access to with the understanding the ability sets themselves won't be mirrored either.

    "Rather than love, than money, than fame, give me truth."

  • Niix_OzekNiix_Ozek Calgary, ABPosts: 397Member
    If they are going to make 4-5 that you can spec to 12-14
    Why the hell not make the classes like daoc an make 12 classes?
    People enjoy having a different class not just two warriors specced different ways
    Look at most classes in daoc, even though you had three spec lines there was little difference between classes, usually just damage type ( for most part )

    Ozek - DAOC
    Niix - Other games that sucked

Sign In or Register to comment.