Ascendancy classes - suggestion

"

Starxsword wrote:

"

Thank god you're not balancing this game. Well, if you were, I wouldn't be playing it for sure.

I have to say, thank god you aren't balancing the game either. To unrestrict something completely is the same as killing build diversity.

I will use Final Fantasy 5 as an example, since that is one of the better examples I can think of. If you haven't played that game before, then, you won't get the example.
Final Fantasy 5 provides a bunch of different classes and allows you to master each class. Once you master the class, you gain some perks of the class if you play your default character.
This offers a lot of flexibility, but since you are allowed to actually master all classes, it kills diversity. Because once you master them all, you are only really using 1 class.

This is the same issue with Path of Exile's skill tree. It would have been fine if each starting character has a max of 70 skill points, this limitation causes your starting location to actually matter. But they have 123 points or so to play with. This kills diversity, because every class can infringe on another class' pathing.

Or let's go to the extreme and give every character 500 skill points. More skill points = more flexibility right? Can you guess what happens if you have 500 skill points to use in the current tree? Do you understand what it means to starting classes if that happens?

What you say might have had merit if evidence didn't so clearly prove you wrong. There are a ton of different builds in this game, whereas by your argument every build should be the same. And before you claim that Cyclone or Incinerate dominates right now and everyone IS playing the same (or that Flameblast used to dominate before) think about the fact that those skills dominate because of their inherent mechanics and not because of the skilltree. So in fact, what kills flexibility in this game is that certain skills are better than others, and that has nothing to do with the fact that the skilltree is open.

So we had better use your argument that restrictions will improve that situation, and restrict Incinerate to Templar and Cyclone to Duelist. What's this? 50% of the population is now playing Templar and the other 50% is playing Duelist? Well fuck, I was sure that the restrictions would force people to play another class... Better make some restricted items and quests to salvage the situation. Spread the cancer.

I hope you can see now that that's not how it works. Class restrictions will only serve to make pigeonhole people even further. This is simply how the world works; Greater freedom breeds inventiveness and creativity, while restrictions cause people to just fall into safe, repetitive patterns. Just like how the technological advancement during the Dark Ages was slow because the Church restricted it and people just lived the peasant life for generations while it is now flourishing.

Yeesh...

The question to be asked seems to be pretty simple, really.

"Is there any actual reason to play a Shadow if the Ranger can get to its Ascendancies for the cost of ~4 passive points while having a much stronger overall position on the tree?"

If you think the answer is yes, then support the suggestion. If you think the answer is no, then offer your insights as to why. The nastiness really doesn't help.

Yes yes, I know. Internet, and a game forum no less. A guy can hope.

"

What you say might have had merit if evidence didn't so clearly prove you wrong. There are a ton of different builds in this game, whereas by your argument every build should be the same.

Evidence proves me right. I don't know where you got the idea that there are a ton of different builds. There is currently little build variation.

That said, if you insist on gimping yourself, yes, you can make as many builds as you want. With the right items, you can simply use default attack and still beat high level maps. But I hope you aren't saying default attack is good.

"

So in fact, what kills flexibility in this game is that certain skills are better than others, and that has nothing to do with the fact that the skilltree is open.

No, the fact that you call the skills by their name as a build is evidence enough that build variety is a joke. It seems like you simply cannot understand why people tend to call an "Incinerate Build" and not a Marauder incinerate build.
Let me explain, it is called that because it doesn't really matter what you start as, there is little difference because you will be getting the same nodes regardless of which "class" you are. Hence you have Incinerate crit and Incinerate non-crit. Not class name Incinerate, because at the end of the day, the class has little effect, since the nodes you take are pretty much the same.

And because of how nodes work, you can swap a few nodes and call it "fireball" build, but really, the nodes taken are all the same. Build variety as you call it is an illusion.

"

Greater freedom breeds inventiveness and creativity, while restrictions cause people to just fall into safe, repetitive patterns.

That's just BS. Greater freedom breeds none of that. Without some kind of restriction, there would be no way to know how to start.
Ever wonder why if someone tells you to "do something", its hard to think up of something? Something is simply too vast without direction. Now, if the subject were more limited, like "do some art", you have more focus on what you can do.

imo the current problem is the meta...

almost every char play as a scion because she got better access to
life nodes
jewelry

with opening up the subclasses scion would still be the GO-TO charater because
~ same distance to every subclass
+ (!)
life nodes
jewelry

therefore
scion would be again the meta...

(i know some things otherclasses can do better but in ALOT of cases the scion can do at least as good as them!)

I have a crazy suggestion, that might not be really that crazy when you think that it might preserve the potential balance of ascendancy classes while giving you what the theme concerned guys want. What if GGG disponibilized character class skins as microtransactions? For example, you could be a marauder, start at the marauder starting area of the tree and have all marauder ascendancy classes but actaully look like a witch. Maybe they could be slightly modified or recolored skins to indicate thats the case. Just an idea that would actually solve most concerns on this thread : 3

"

Starxsword wrote:

Stuff

Your response is laughable. You selectively quoted parts of my text, omitting half of the argument in most cases, to make it seem like I said something different than what I actually said.

Then you said something about "Incinerate crit". Incinerate has 0 base crit. Do you even play the game? Why the heck are you here? Even if your post contained ANY well-presented, structured, and justified argument, bolstered by examples (which it did not) the fact that you do not know basic game mechanics would have made you lose all credibility. Which you had none of to begin with.

Stop making a fool of yourself and go do something you're actually good at, cos arguing is not one of your strong points. Heck, I wonder if you actually have any.

"

JohnNamikaze wrote:

I actually like this suggestion since I still have mixed feelings with how Ascendancy classes are approached at the moment. Not too keen that each classes (not sure about Scion) are cemented to just three sub-classes each.

Agree on that and would like to have (use) this, because the other option would be a char-respec-thing. Example tree: It started as shadow with a bow and reached the ranger area. No matter as which you started its the same build (just different char visuals) but all we know from ascendancy now it will matter as what you start, so you need to keep that in mind. Besides that it means to restart a fresh char and investing many hours again just because rangers sub classes would suit better (or as I said the char-respec-thing would be needed).

Therefore i would really like to unlock sub classes as you reach diffrent start points. (Which also arises the question (how) is it possible to change a sub class.)

"

PrimordialDarkness wrote:

"

Starxsword wrote:

Stuff

Your response is laughable. You selectively quoted parts of my text, omitting half of the argument in most cases, to make it seem like I said something different than what I actually said.

Then you said something about "Incinerate crit". Incinerate has 0 base crit. Do you even play the game? Why the heck are you here? Even if your post contained ANY well-presented, structured, and justified argument, bolstered by examples (which it did not) the fact that you do not know basic game mechanics would have made you lose all credibility. Which you had none of to begin with.

Stop making a fool of yourself and go do something you're actually good at, cos arguing is not one of your strong points. Heck, I wonder if you actually have any.

If you cannot attack the argument, attack the messenger. Old strategy, still despicable.

"

Rob2655 wrote:

Example tree:

It started as shadow with a bow and reached the ranger area. No matter as which you started its the same build (just different char visuals) but all we know from ascendancy now it will matter as what you start, so you need to keep that in mind.

Which is good, because it makes choice matter.In practice, as response to the topic:a) People wanted more defined classes, they got them, now you want to take them away again?b) If we ignore the Scion, there is no difference anymore between starting as a Shadow or Ranger, as in the example above. The builds are identical. Also, you win nothing: Instead of starting as a Shadow and going to the Ranger area to get the Ranger Ascendancy, you could have started as a Ranger in the beginning and taken the same skill tree. So, you gain, well, nothing. So, doesn't really make a difference except for cosmetics.c) If we look at the Scion, we realise that that is different. You CAN make Scion builds that reach the Witch starting nodes and that are not possible as the Witch, while you CAN NOT make Witch builds that reach the Scion starting node and are not possible as a Scion. The reason is that the Scion skill tree branches in three directions, while the others essentially only branch in one.Because of this, I am opposed to this. It is a buff to the Scion, and I don't think the Scion needs a buff.

"

Char1983 wrote:

"

PrimordialDarkness wrote:

"

Starxsword wrote:

Stuff

Your response is laughable. You selectively quoted parts of my text, omitting half of the argument in most cases, to make it seem like I said something different than what I actually said.

Then you said something about "Incinerate crit". Incinerate has 0 base crit. Do you even play the game? Why the heck are you here? Even if your post contained ANY well-presented, structured, and justified argument, bolstered by examples (which it did not) the fact that you do not know basic game mechanics would have made you lose all credibility. Which you had none of to begin with.

Stop making a fool of yourself and go do something you're actually good at, cos arguing is not one of your strong points. Heck, I wonder if you actually have any.

If you cannot attack the argument, attack the messenger. Old strategy, still despicable.

"

Rob2655 wrote:

Example tree:

It started as shadow with a bow and reached the ranger area. No matter as which you started its the same build (just different char visuals) but all we know from ascendancy now it will matter as what you start, so you need to keep that in mind.

Which is good, because it makes choice matter.In practice, as response to the topic:a) People wanted more defined classes, they got them, now you want to take them away again?b) If we ignore the Scion, there is no difference anymore between starting as a Shadow or Ranger, as in the example above. The builds are identical. Also, you win nothing: Instead of starting as a Shadow and going to the Ranger area to get the Ranger Ascendancy, you could have started as a Ranger in the beginning and taken the same skill tree. So, you gain, well, nothing. So, doesn't really make a difference except for cosmetics.c) If we look at the Scion, we realise that that is different. You CAN make Scion builds that reach the Witch starting nodes and that are not possible as the Witch, while you CAN NOT make Witch builds that reach the Scion starting node and are not possible as a Scion. The reason is that the Scion skill tree branches in three directions, while the others essentially only branch in one.Because of this, I am opposed to this. It is a buff to the Scion, and I don't think the Scion needs a buff.

Oh my god, [Removed by Support] it's swiftly moving from being comical to being just sad. He literally had NO arguments whatsoever in his post, I already picked them apart earlier. Most of it was him picking specific sentences out of context and commenting on them, which means nothing since their context was LOST. And do you just skim read, or did you read the point where I said he obviously doesn't know basic game mechanics and thus lost all credibility? As to your quoting the post by Rob, are you really THAT dense or did you not read the part where he says this is an existing character that he will have to relevel with this expansion? This is the argument I have been presenting for DAYS now and it still flies over [Removed by Support].

I see your arguments, I just don't agree with them. Stop insulting me. Post reported.