Will there be any mix-mashing of Ascendancy classes?

I kind of agree with Ragnarok tbh, the 'build diversity' atm in the way we are talking about is a pretty shallow, meaningless diversity. Theres "I can do this as 3 different skins" and then "these other starts are terrible for this dont use them". This is actual choices.



I feel for the op, I cant really comment on the details because I dont play summoners, i dont know the mechanics, I cant evaluate what Im looking at on the trees and what you people are saying against experiences. I dunno if necro is the clear winner, I think theres some defensive subclasses that are just universally good for people using the defenses in those areas of the tree, I would say for sure there is going to be summoners who are not Necromancer, that we can be sure of I think and some of them will work.

I dont know if its where it needs to be for min max, but personally this is how Im looking at it. Every build needs a subclass it works with, and every class that currently has a lot of builds in an area needs a subclass that is decent for those builds. I was super worried about witch but it looks like she has that now, thank goodness, Im very happy with the state of what weve seen so far. I think what needs to be there is looking like its going to be there.

Looking forward though is a different thing, ^ this is what we need to not slaughter build diversity immediately, but we might need more to actually encourage more diversity eventually. Its a modular system, theres nothing to stop them adding a new ascendancy tree to each class as they do their usual tour around the tree revamping the starts. 6 months from now they update the marauder and templar starts, we get a new subclass for each, a year from now they revamp witch and she gets one etc. I dunno if they have plans for this but it would seem silly not to. This is a new method by which they can change metas, increase build diversity, give us something new were excited for. And it does it without destruction right? Its not changing the trees, gems and mechanics we are already using its novelty through addition rather than mutation. Once they know whats lacking and whats restricting in the current system when weve lived with it for a while Im sure ideas will build up. If theres too much buildup in an area like all summons are going witch it can be fixed over time, I think whats most important right now is to make sure summons and all other playstyles still actually exist on the other side of this release.

"

Vipermagi wrote:

"

Zhatan wrote:

I personally agree with the OP though, there will be one way to do builds, that is better then the others. Thats just the way the game is designed. If you wanna go something creative and fun, be prepared to drop some % effectiveness on the way.

Yep. This'll always be the case when there's choices to be made. Luckily, Ascendancies won't really change that at all, it'll only shift around a bit.

ya exactly, same is true right now.

When you look at choices you can view them along a scale I think from something that is mathematically better on one end, eg this route gets 8% attack speed and this other one gets 12%, doesnt matter if its 1% better there is a 'better' choice, theres no debate. At the other end of the spectrum you have a choice between things that cant be compared with numbers and it purely comes down to personal preference.

What this does which is really positive, imo, is to push the meaningful choices more towards the latter. Right now youre looking at 5 nodes, ranger/shadow is the classic example. Do I want the 5 damage ndoes at the shadow start or the 5 defense nodes at the ranger start? Well thats sort of preference really, comparing damage to defense? Thats really grey area stuff. But its not, because when I start shadow I take 4 of the 5 defense nodes from the ranger start. If I go ranger, It only costs me 1 point extra to start as her, but then I look at the 5 shadow damage nodes and realise I can get way better damage nodes or jewel slots further out in the tree that ARE mathematically better for the same end point spend. Bang, its done, you just mathed shadow out of the choices.

But now whats the case? Whats the build? Lets say your cast on crit barrage elemental spells via crit wand attacking. Ive not played it recently but ranger is now proj damage and shadow has ele damage so u can math which has more % increase in the start and find a best. But ascendancy lands, surely shadow now right? Assassin, how could you not, youll max crit chance so easily and all ur spells will get crazy base crit from the charges too and absolutely truck, more cc against full life, its amazing. But... ranger deadeye, point blank pierce? Fading out at range but then a free chain when things stop piercing? Crit chance per pierce chance, ur barrage pierces, procs way more, then it chains, procs even more again, the fireballs it launches now pierce and chain all over the place. That could also be legitimately nuts. How do you compare that? You cant compare that on a calculator like you can with the first 5 nodes of a tree, and its so much more meaningful than what skin you get to wear. The fact that Im going to make both those builds, thats where it really becomes great imo because atm I just have 1 character and now Im gonna have 2. Thats content, it cant be a bad thing. Worst comes to worst one of those feels so much better in practice that I stick with it, and then we have what we have now, 1 choice but at least I made it for more interesting reasons having actually played both, I didnt make the decision with a calculator in the build planner before I even opened the game. That feels pretty soulless right?

Your posts are awful walls, Snorkle_uk, but I like to read them and what you're saying. :)
Hype for Ascendancy and a great concept idea!
In the end there will be a way to compare those talents with each other, in forms of clearspeed or whatever, but that is just the nature of min maxing and ok to me. I can live with playing a build that is 5% slower but plays and functions very differently.

The addon will definitely stir things up, and that's very exciting!

"

Pewzor wrote:

Ascendancy clearly kills diversity.

Haven't read the whole thread, but... how come ascendancy kills diversity?
You yourself said that you're a min/maxer, so you probably don't care about the looks of your character. Right now the difference beetwen Witch, Scion and Templar is like 5-6 nodes. In many builds it's even lower, or literally 0 difference. Like for example LL/CI Bladefall that picks both, Shadow's starting nodes (phys dmg) and Witch's (ES).

Now you get a chance for your class to actually make any difference, cause every one of them has something else to offer. How does it kill diversity?

diversity is overrated

oh look, another "my hipster choices that suck now will suck even more compared to good ones, qq" thread

"

RagnarokChu wrote:

Yet again I have 0 idea why people believe this.

Diversity right now basically means "I can pick whatever character skin I like the most." There is almost no difference between any character class other then like 1-2% difference in power (assuming obviously you choose the class near the nodes you want). That isn't real diversity because diversity means "variety" or "an range of different things."


Will I play a mara/duelist summoner pre-patch? No because it would completely suck, would I play a mara/duelist summoner after patch? No it would completely suck.

Is witch still the most "optimal" character for summoner after patch? Sure, is templar still the 2nd best summoner after patch? Yeah sure.

What changed really other than the option for more interesting class builds. People need to get over character model = new build or some shit. Diversity isn't the amount of character models that can play a build.

Diversity is the amount of total viable builds and variants that you can play ~.~

Perfect observation of what's going on with this "build diversity" backlash.

At the end of the day, you're arguing about a character model. A character model you didn't give a single shit about until the expansion announcement. Get over it.

"

1453R wrote:

If you're concerned with absolute maximum clearspeed and shaving every last nanosecond off your fight times (i.e. Pewzor), then yes - Ascendancy classes will potentially reduce diversity. 'Course, literally all of those players are basically already running very minor variations on CoC Discheese, so...frankly, if even one Ascendancy class introduces even one option that's competitive with CoC Discheese, then Ascendancy will have increased min/max diversity.

"

k1rage wrote:

OP your a confusing guy, you say you dont like to play optmial builds....

well then dont its not like Templar summoners will not be any weaker than they were pre-ascendancy

the witch will be the optimal way to play a summoner, but then again it was pre-ascendancy as well...

Because before there wasn't such a obviously insanely strong build, I could go templer before because I "only" lost around 3-5 skillpints and I could live with that

Now I'd lose 3-5 skillpoints AND ascendancy points, over fucking 45% minion damage, 30% life and 100% damage/life for spectres (insane).

"

Pi2rEpsilon wrote:

Point of order; With the subclasses revealed now there isn't an optimal path for totem users.

I don't ever play totemers, but I think you'd be insane to argue against the one ascendancy class that has totem skills?

"

Krehlmar wrote:

"

Pi2rEpsilon wrote:

Point of order; With the subclasses revealed now there isn't an optimal path for totem users.

I don't ever play totemers, but I think you'd be insane to argue against the one ascendancy class that has totem skills?

Yes, because obviously classes that don't have dedicated totem skills don't benefit totem builds, or by definition don't benefit totem builds as much as classes that do. ARE YOU FOR REAL?

For every build, what matters is how much the different classes' skills benefit it, not whether the class has dedicated totem skills or not!

Hierophant has some skills that are useful for all totem builds, but this is very different from being better than the alternatives for all totem builds.

But since you consider it insane for me to argue this point, I can only assume that you somehow managed to read the first line of the post you are quoting without making the effort of reading the remainder of my post, which laid out my general argument for why Hierophants would not always be optimal and included an explicit example of my own current Scion totem build that is better off being rebuilt for Duelist/Champion, Shadow/Assassin, and Ranger/Pathfinder than Templar/Hierophant.

Alternatively, that you did read my post and considered my arguments for why Hierophant doesn't benefit my own build as much as the other classes insane, but didn't have the courtesy of explaining your reasoning to me.


EDIT: Fixed formatting errors.