Afraid of the new Ascendancy Classes

"

maxor wrote:

If you want to play a frenzy charge crit bow skill user for example (which is a popular build for lots of classes) you will have to play it on a ranger or you will be doing it wrong.

Umm what? First of all there are tons of way to build frenzy crit bow builds now.

You can play it as any of the three duelist specs which can give you these stats:

Slayer:
40% increased damage vs rares and uniques (Single target damage? Why thank you.)
Onslaught on kill
Increased damage and atk speed on leech or Stun
All the intermediary two handed nodes from the subclass (Yes they work with bows.)

Gladiator:
Max block/Spell Block + Increased damage etc

Champion:
Permanent Fortify
An extra aura with 30% damage and 5% movement speed

You can play it as shadow:
Capped Crit with Lioneye's Glare (WUT)
Easy Power Charges
etc

You're literally just claiming something is broken without thinking of how you can improve old builds. You see frenzy charge effects and cling onto that as the only viable thing out there. Like seriously think before you speak.

Before Ascendancy: Class is the last thing you decide.
After Ascendancy: Class is the first thing you decide.

I thought about this and I too first thought that this change could be terrible for build diversity. But then I realized that picking a class doesn't matter much at the moment and the choices are kind of fake. For example if I want to play cyclone I will always want to start as Templar, Maradeur or Duelist, and it really doesn't matter which one of the three I pick. Now I have to choose wisely and depending on which class I pick I have a substantially different cyclone character. I like the change now.

"

ReZar wrote:

The thing is the game is not made specifically for people like you - I assume you play standard and mostly the same character sort of the way people are playing in a MMO.

So you are right you can't just change but guess what you can make a new character even in another league, mind blown!

Pointless and narrow minded response. Not everyone plays the game same way you do.

"

toyotatundra wrote:

"

ReZar wrote:

The thing is the game is not made specifically for people like you - I assume you play standard and mostly the same character sort of the way people are playing in a MMO.

So you are right you can't just change but guess what you can make a new character even in another league, mind blown!

Pointless and narrow minded response. Not everyone plays the game same way you do.

QFT. Many people don't want to be a hamster playing in one of the hamster wheel leagues. We prefer playing in the only long term worthwhile league instead...

"

Fluffy_Puppies wrote:

QFT. Many people don't want to be a hamster playing in one of the hamster wheel leagues. We prefer playing in the only long term worthwhile league instead...

Temporary hamster wheel > eternal hamster wheel ;)

"

MrTremere wrote:

I have a question : will we be able to re-spec ascendancy classes and ascendancy points?

Yes you will.

Peace,

-Boem-

"

MrTremere wrote:

I have a question : will we be able to re-spec ascendancy classes and ascendancy points?

yes, confirmed by chris last night on the podcast I believe

"

Xavderion wrote:

I thought about this and I too first thought that this change could be terrible for build diversity. But then I realized that picking a class doesn't matter much at the moment and the choices are kind of fake. For example if I want to play cyclone I will always want to start as Templar, Maradeur or Duelist, and it really doesn't matter which one of the three I pick. Now I have to choose wisely and depending on which class I pick I have a substantially different cyclone character. I like the change now.

exactly this ^


At first glance I was "wait this might not be a good thing at all"... and then I realised it was awesome and exactly what we need. A lot of the complaints I see are from summoners, theres some concerns with niche options like that but Im sure they can be ironed out and theres room to add more sub classes in the future, this is now a way they can expand options over the coming years. Adding 3 new sub classes may change more about builds than updating the existing passive tree where we simply find ways to make the same builds again slightly more efficiently, which seems to have been the way with most tree changes so far, and it does so without hurting anything because its a completely new option.




The shadow/ranger life based melee dagger example is the one that I keep coming back to. Right now I always pick ranger, you just end up with the same tree on either class except the shadow starts with 5x bad phys nodes where the ranger just takes 1 evasion node at the start and then spends the other 4 points getting better physical damage elsewhere on the tree. Its just better, theres no choice between shadow and ranger for me. Its a complete illusion that I can start as shadow or ranger, the difference is so small that its basically meaningless but ultimately its maths and the ranger simply gets slightly more numbers.

Now if i go ranger I get an onslaught raider with significantly more evasion and absolutely insane attack and move speed. If I go shadow I get the assassin with mad crit. Both are appealing and different, theres a real choice there and I want to play both. If all classes could access all sub classes I would do both, but I would do both as a ranger because on the current tree ranger is better, its not even a debate thats pure maths. If the crazy crit and the crazy speed options were on the current tree what I would do is start ranger, always, and then spec both, always. I would take the crit and the speed, not being able to afford to go all out on both I would find the exact balance between crit and attack speed that was optimal for me and bang, I would be back to having 1 real option which is starting ranger and ending up with 1 dagger build. In theory I could do ranger with mad crit, ranger with mad speed, shadow with mad crit or shadow with mad speed were it a more open system like people want, but the reality is there would be no reason to ever choose the 2 shadow options so already thats less diveristy in practice and if I could blend between sub classes for even more flexibility I would find THE perfect balance between them and just essentially narrow everything down to 1 option.



Right now I can make a gmp tornado ranger or a chain split ranger. In fact I have those, or should I say that because its the same char. Its exactly the same build I just swap the named 2 gems for the other 2 named gems, even my other 4 supports in the 6 link stay the same, faster attacks, phys proj, pcoc, added fire. The tree stays exactly the same, I have 1 bow character it does all my bow things from a single optimal physical crit bow tree.

With the new sub classes now the split wants to go ricochet, the tornado wants powerful precision, but then both youd be awesome with the onslaught tree, and actually the avatar of phasing could be awesome for bows. Now theres a good way to go high high pierce and maybe Ill try a gmp pierce lightning arrow. But then theres shadow, that crazy crit, thats actually a completely different option that is equally as appealing as all these other things.. I might end up with 3 or more bow characters now that will all be distinctively different rather than having 1 bow ranger with a 1 size fits all optimal passive tree where I literally get everything I want at the same time in the most efficient method possible from the single mathmatically correct starting class.




Ziggy D is exactly right, we have theoretical passive point flexibility atm but its often a shallow, fake flexibility when you dig deep enough. This is inevitable because ultimately your passive points share all the pressures of all your investments and the interesting options that can make your character different are pushed aside by the pressing need for as much raw life and damage as you can get. Thats what we choose classes for right now, a tiny % difference in the exact same stats if you are playing the game smart and a cosmetic difference if you dont look at numbers and pick classes based on looks. I feel like the people saying this kills diversity are looking only at the principal of the matter and not the reality, this is a theoretical reduction in options, right, but in real terms this increases our realistic options and you would begin to loose that if you tried to 'increase' our options more by making the system more open and flexible. I have a reason to play duelist, I have a reason to play melee/bow shadow, I have a reason to play templar. You make it more flexible where any class can choose any subclass that goes away. Ive literally never made a templar, I think theyre shit, absolutely shit. Ill go within 2 nodes of his start on some builds and yet completely write off the entire class based on how crap those 2 nodes are compared to the first 2 nodes of another class. Thats the sad result of our currently flexibility, it leads to a very stale, limiting situation.


Obviously summoners have fair concerns, GGG are aware so lets see what the other sub classes give and then see how limiting or not the situation looks. We dont have the specifics to get that specific yet, but i understand they have legit concerns and I dont want to downplay that. For sure its important GGG get the balance right here and that the options are as flexible as they need to be.

"

Xavderion wrote:

"

Fluffy_Puppies wrote:

QFT. Many people don't want to be a hamster playing in one of the hamster wheel leagues. We prefer playing in the only long term worthwhile league instead...

Temporary hamster wheel > eternal hamster wheel ;)

That would be true, good thing I don't play in hardcore.

I am pretty sure my lvls, gear, and orbs never reset. =)