|
Bannished Rogue -> RE: Tier 2 class variants (5/10/2022 23:31:38)
|
quote:
Cray said:
There is no such thing as a tier 2.05 class in the announced model. As it was mentioned when the dead thread with that now-precluded suggested model was revived, there are no intermediary tiers nor tiers beyond 3. The former would serve no purpose, Serve no purpose? I would disagree and like to discuss this premise.
Foreword: To be clear, it is not of my opinion that the game needs to reference the decimal tiers, as they don't even mention the numerical whole numbers at all as at even a minimum (not to suggest that they should or shouldn't). I also wasn't and currently still not suggesting there to be tiers beyond 3, only quantifying that they are above a flat 3 based on the metric, and then contemplating what a potential tier 4 would be like, but neither suggesting for nor against.
However, in terms for the forum community, the argument was made (on the referenced and linked dead thread) whether or not there should or shouldn't be those intermediate class tiers identified that have similar concepts. This point was not only never legitimately argued against the idea of that it should; just a statement that it isn't part of the future summer plan (which isn't the same thing as arguing the idea/concept). On the contrary, it was actually widely accepted and agreed upon and added to. So to counter points to the point that it would "serve no purpose", intermediate classes (as described on the dead thread):
• Would better thematically fill certain niches- This also help identify potentially overlooked niches that deserve attention to ensure an all inclusive player-base.
• Allow a way for all classes to stay relative- given my example of a down-triggered 3.05 being weaker than an up-triggered 2.05.
• Used for future suggestion thread for either new or revamping of existing classes- Which is a key point of this discussion thread.
• Gives greater purpose for each class to create more content-ness for each class being where it is (mechanical identity)- Everyone is fine with fighter/mage/rogue for being essentially at the bottom of the totem pole because their purpose was to teach new players of the class system and strategizing more than just dealing direct damage, etc.
quote:
Cray said:
As of build variants: These are not an announced feature of T2 classes, nor one that would leave us with much in the way of design space -- This is because, by necessity, each of these classes is already covering a narrower niche than a class of any other tier. So while there's virtually no scenario in which Tier 2 classes or their Master Class armors can entirely outperform T3 classes, there isn't a practical reason to reduce their niche further when the alternatives would realistically be covered by other Tier 2 classes. I also disagree. By this logic, wouldn't this suggest that the martial artist, knight, and darkovia slayer classes be brought down to one path and armor because completely separate classes could be made to cover each of the branching armors' niches? These are built in a way that a particular slightly broader niche can be built out to the different facets that creates unique playstyles. For instance, if (like suggested) martial artist class became backlash focused at a base, with each style relating to either rogue (slithering sneak), berserker (troll fist), mage (dragon breath), etc., when it comes to direct damage; that still doesn't take away the possibility of having a more mage like class or beastmaster like class that falls under the broader niche of backlash with a focus on less direct damage and more through statuses.
Evidence of this is the luna neko armors; for some strange reason NO-ONE seems to acknowledge it for being a relevant fully defensive ranger class. Because it leaves something to be desired by a different niche within the same general category of defensive ranger. The same goes for what I suggested for a potential revamp for the pirate class being in line with the general beastmaster niche. Even how it is designed, it wouldn't take anything away from the necromancer class base to base. It sells (and rewards) the full commitment to the pirate roleplaying to match up to the higher tier of necromancer class only increases build satisfaction and immersion.
Also, this helps consolidate where to find certain builds instead of having 100 different classes that are all only slightly different. Such a thing would feel extremely contrived, which ruins the appeal of classes as a whole.
quote:
Cray said:
So while there's virtually no scenario in which Tier 2 classes or their Master Class armors can entirely outperform T3 classes The intention isn't for them to generically outperform, it is to give relevancy to the lower tiers that thematically make sense as to why a lower tier could even preform at the same level if not even better than a higher tier. Essentially, having the individual specific right tools for a particular job should be rewarded compared to a jack of all trades master of none multi-tool.
e.g: a dragonslayer should be able to deal with any dragon except for undead/were/ghost, better than a paladin; especially a light dragon
This overall doesn't take anything away from the power of a paladin to be generally more powerful, but still allows the lower tier to be relevant if applied correctly. All of this was theorized prior to the announcement of the master class armors; which I believe, prior to getting to the end game, there is still a significant portion of the game where almost all > 3 tier classes become basically useless. This would extend the range of use prior to getting to the endgame armors.
|
|
|
|
