Author Topic: Public Discussion of New Classes  (Read 3882 times)

Brokkr

  • Administrator
  • Posts: 507
Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
« Reply #25 on: June 21, 2018, 01:10:44 PM »
Warrior doesn't have ride on its skill list either.  If it isn't listed, it will work like it does for them.

Brokkr

  • Administrator
  • Posts: 507
Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
« Reply #26 on: June 21, 2018, 01:20:42 PM »
http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Raider
http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Raider%20Branching


Branching states "Parry to Blind Fighting" but the main Raider helpfile doesn't mention Blind Fighting

http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Infiltrator
http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Fighter%20Branching

Branching has "Listen to Watch" but the main Infiltrator helpfile had it starting with Watch
It also doesn't mention 'Threaten' as a skill to branch in the helpfile - I was on the wrong page.  I was on fighter.

Thanks!

Fixed Raider helpfile.  Technically listen does branch to watch, but watch is put on everyone's skill list at chargen.  So essentially it is functioning like a starting skill.  Took it off the branching page.

Brokkr

  • Administrator
  • Posts: 507
Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
« Reply #27 on: June 21, 2018, 01:29:42 PM »
Labourer:

Fletchery to Sword Making?
Not
Knife Making to Sword Making?

Other classes have Knife Making to Sword Making

That is the way it works atm.  I can't remember if I was trying to make it different than other paths, or if I added knife making later.

Brytta Léofa

  • Posts: 507
Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
« Reply #28 on: June 21, 2018, 01:37:15 PM »
Brokkr, some of the help files say, e.g., "Hunting specialized for wilderness environments" when the guild doesn't get hunt.

Should that be removed? or is it an indication that if you get hunt from a subguild you'll get (e.g.) wilderness hunt enabled?
then the father hen will call his chickens home

Brokkr

  • Administrator
  • Posts: 507
Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
« Reply #29 on: June 21, 2018, 01:43:56 PM »
It is intentional and it an indication that if you get hunt from a subguild you'll get (e.g.) wilderness hunt enabled.

worldofsand

  • Posts: 20
Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
« Reply #30 on: June 21, 2018, 01:47:52 PM »
There are some peculiar branch paths in some classes. Unless branching points have been lowered to something far more lenient than the previous "almost maxed" requirment, some of these seem borderline impossible to branch. Since we're finally rid of the issue of some guilds having to take 10-20 days to branch parry, it's strange to see the following:

Quote
enforcer:
bash -> disarm
piercing weapons -> backstab
Bash is nearly impossible to raise much higher than journeyman or maybe advanced. I've never even heard of someone mastering it. It increases very slowly, and for some races, you'll have an incredibly hard time failing once it's around journeyman.

Piercing into backstab sounds like a nightmare unless it branches at journeyman. If it has to be near maxed, most enforcers will never branch one of their defining abilities. This also massively inflates the value of any subguild that gives backstab.

Quote
raider:
kick -> disarm
Kick is another one of those skills that just don't go up properly. You can be a 10+ day warrior and still have apprentice kick even though you use it regularly. Furthermore, this is a guild designed heavily for mounted combat where you can't kick at all.

Quote
soldier:
slashing weapons -> riposte
chopping weapons -> hack
Same as above, weapon skills are notoriously gruesome to raise. The vast majority of even Bynners and soldiers never get past the halfway point. Without huge changes to how weapon skills increase, I think it's a mistake to gate important skills behind them.

Quote
fighter:
guarding -> threaten
Threaten is mostly a skill for muggers, robbers and raiders. Those are characters that can't realistically train guarding unless they first spend an incredibly long time in a military clan. Since there are only really three of those left in the game, and two of them are very much at odds with any kind of robber concept, this seems like a strange branch.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2018, 01:49:36 PM by worldofsand »

Brokkr

  • Administrator
  • Posts: 507
Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
« Reply #31 on: June 21, 2018, 02:05:17 PM »
Enforcer backstab and sap branch just a tad lower than advanced weapons used to pop up.

Enforcer and Raider disarm is fairly heavily gated, you are correct.  This is intentional.  Fighters don't have a lot of unique skills, so part of the balancing was to give them starting disarm at the same time other heavy combat characters would really need to work at something to get it.  This is a trade off for Enforcer and Raider starting with survival skills.

Both of these points are mitigated by the fact that combat skills for heavy combat characters start higher than they do for warriors. It is the one thing you can't see in the help files.  Perhaps a play tester or two will chime in on their thoughts on starting skill levels.

Soldier riposte and hack branch no where near the max of the weapon skills they branch from.

Raiders and Enforcers get threaten to start with.  Fighters have to work for it.  Threaten has uses for law enforcement (perhaps even moreso than for raiders) and shouldn't actually be that hard to get, if you are in a clan that practices it.

worldofsand

  • Posts: 20
Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
« Reply #32 on: June 21, 2018, 02:43:05 PM »
Quote
Enforcer backstab and sap branch just a tad lower than advanced weapons used to pop up.

That's still pretty stingy. Not sure how much "just a tad" is, but if you still need piercing/bludgeoning at mid-advanced then it's going to be just like ranger parry used to be, i.e. 20+ days played to branch. I had hoped we'd get away from the problem of classes taking RL months to branch very important skills.

The whole reason to play enforcer is because it gets master backstab/sap. Otherwise it's basically just a raider without ride, archery, listen and scan. Most warriors never branched their special weapon skills. If you have to reach almost the same skill level to branch class-defining skills on an enforcer, I think that's problematic.

Just sounds like one is overwhelmingly compelled to pair this class with slipknife to not only start with backstab but also get master sneak/hide, and poisoning. It seems like too much of a synergy, especially considering the fact that it's a combo that actually gets almost all the same skills.

Quote
Enforcer and Raider disarm is fairly heavily gated, you are correct.  This is intentional.  Fighters don't have a lot of unique skills, so part of the balancing was to give them starting disarm at the same time other heavy combat characters would really need to work at something to get it.  This is a trade off for Enforcer and Raider starting with survival skills.

I would much prefer if enforcers and raiders get a lower cap on disarm, instead of getting it to master but having it nearly impossible to branch. Out of curiosity, does anyone ever actually master kick and bash? I'm just leery of these branches that pretty much say "you don't really get this skill unless your name is X-D."

And, again, a huge incentive to take a subguild whose skills overlap with your class', just to start with an important skill instead of having to spar for RL months in order to get it. It feels a bit like backwards design if you deliberately take a subguild with skill overlap because that's a bigger asset to your class than a subguild that gives you something you wouldn't otherwise get at all.

I just feel like... how's a raider ever really gonna branch disarm? I've never seen kick go above journeyman. I've seen advanced dual wield and weapon skills before kick hits journeyman. Even if it generously branches at just the threshold to advanced, that sounds gruelling.

If the intent is for certain core class skills to be something most players don't actually obtain, I think that's a mistake.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2018, 02:54:01 PM by worldofsand »

Brokkr

  • Administrator
  • Posts: 507
Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
« Reply #33 on: June 21, 2018, 02:43:47 PM »
To address some previous posts:

Krath / XD: Seems like you are talking about certain play styles.  What would you choose for a noble?  Aide?  GMH Agent?

Armaddict / Vox:  Soooo, you want to remake assassin.  Sorry.  You get a guy that really knows combat and if he hits his backstab you are in trouble, but he has to find an opportunity to have his stealth work.  You have a guy that has a slightly broader toolset (poisons), can decently sneak and can decently fight.  And you have the guy that is an absolute ghost stealth wise, but is going to need to rely on their poisons and what not to finish off their target, most likely.

Realize none of those are the old assassin, they are intentionally created to not be.

WithSprinkles

  • Posts: 404
Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
« Reply #34 on: June 21, 2018, 02:57:32 PM »
Would it be a bad thing for the mercantile classes to get flee? Even with the fact that they have journeyman combat skills, they are likely some of the only people likely to pull out a shield with any regularity and HACK is now a thing.

I'm not certain I understand why this seems to solely be a combat character utility. I get that it's not just running in the right direction, but also running without provoking an attack of opportunity, but even a low chance is better than almost no chance.

BadSkeelz

  • Posts: 8384
Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
« Reply #35 on: June 21, 2018, 03:03:51 PM »
@Brokkr,

Nice to know that soldier branches are lower than the old advanced weapon skills branch point.

Re: threaten, if this skill has "uses for law enforcement" isn't it kind of weird that soldier doesn't have it at all? I expected to see threaten (and possibly scan or hunt) in it's skill list much more than weapon crafting.
janeshephard: You really think BadSkeelz understands the concept of Wine In Front of me? This guy shot me as a townie when he felt threatened. The man's a neandrathal.

Miradus: He's not some weird mental abomination. He's just a guy on the internet.

hyzhenhok

  • Posts: 1663
Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
« Reply #36 on: June 21, 2018, 03:05:52 PM »
Some more thoughts:

I like Enforcer and Raider as they are. They're meant to be subtypes of warrior, not subtypes of Assassin and Ranger. I can actually see myself rolling a Fighter, too; with subguilds the opportunity cost of not going Enforcer or Raider isn't that high.

I guess the light combat classes seem underwhelming because we are not familiar with the combat skill rebalancing? If they're actually better than current ranger/assassin, it kinda makes sense. Still, comparing the light combat Infiltrator and Soldier to the mixed Miscreant and Laborer the balance doesn't quite seem right. Infiltrator isn't good enough at stealth and Miscreant is too good at murder, so I'm not sure why anyone would pick Infiltrator over Enforcer or Miscreant. I do like the Infiltrator vs. Miscreant division versus the old Assassin v. Burglar v. Pickpocket division, I just think the balance should probably be tweaked.

Soldier...just seems like a missed opportunity, because it seems like it'd be perfect spot to fill the "I want to be like a Fighter, but I want to trade a bit of combat skill for perception without any of that wilderness or stealth nonsense" niche. Instead it trades combat expertise for weapon crafting. It can't be because Light Combat classes aren't allowed to have perception, because Infiltrator and Stalker both get Scan. It seems like it would be more intuitive if Fighter -> Soldier -> Laborer went Pure Combat -> Trade some combat for perception -> trade some more combat for crafting, instead of -> first trade combat for some perception and some crafting -> trade even more combat for great perception and even more crafting. Again, it seems like you'll usually be better off picking Fighter or Laborer (or any of other light/heavy combat classes) than using Soldier as a base class.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2018, 03:11:07 PM by hyzhenhok »

BadSkeelz

  • Posts: 8384
Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
« Reply #37 on: June 21, 2018, 03:25:34 PM »
My impression of the Soldier class is that it wasn't envisioned to be able to fulfil the militiaman law-enforcement "thief catcher". Instead it seems much better tooled towards a moderately self-sufficient combatant. Much like how the Mercenary subguild is. So the name is a bit of a misnomer.
janeshephard: You really think BadSkeelz understands the concept of Wine In Front of me? This guy shot me as a townie when he felt threatened. The man's a neandrathal.

Miradus: He's not some weird mental abomination. He's just a guy on the internet.

worldofsand

  • Posts: 20
Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
« Reply #38 on: June 21, 2018, 03:58:28 PM »
Is there some measure of standardization between scan and hide levels with the new classes? Previously, every guild that got either skill got it to master. You only had less than master if you got it from a subguild or race. The master "bracket" is a lot narrower than the previous ones, and still there was a huge difference between having the lowest master hide/scan or the highest. The pre-master brackets are much wider, and most classes that get these skills get them at advanced. Are their caps distributed all throughout the advanced bracket?

Scan has a very narrow window of viability. If the target has more than like half a skill bracket's worth in hide than you have in scan, you simply can't spot them. In fact, low advanced scan would spot virtually nothing. Granted, that's because all guilds that got hide got it to master, but the same is true of NPCs. There are very, very few hidden NPCs you can spot with anything short of near-master scan. Even rats aren't detectable until you're a ways into advanced. There are NPCs that even maxed ranger scan with very high wisdom has a miniscule chance to spot. If there are guilds whose advanced scan caps at just the threshold to advanced, they won't be able to spot practically any NPCs in the 'rinth, for instance.

Advanced sneak/hide can work because they're fairly binary, but scan below master was previously near-useless. Now it's a lot more spread out, which sounds like a good idea... but! Only three guilds get master scan, and none of those are in any way suited for law enforcement. In fact, soldier, fighter and enforcer don't get scan at all. And most subguilds with scan get it to journeyman. Journeyman scan might as well not exist. You might spot a kagor, that's about it.

There's going to be a period of time where most new characters are completely helpless against legacy rangers, burglars, pickpockets and assassins. Of the old guilds, all but warrior and merchant get master hide. You will not spot them with advanced scan. That'll correct itself over time, but I'm more concerned with the possibility that not enough of the new classes have a high enough scan for it to be useful. If a number of them get low advanced scan and most classes with hide get it to high advanced, that'll cause some problems.

For reference, this is what the new classes get:

Scan
advanced: raider, infiltrator, scout, pilferer, adventurer, dune trader,
master: miscreant, stalker, laborer

Hide
advanced: enforcer, raider, infiltrator, scout, pilferer, adventurer, fence
master: miscreant, stalker,
« Last Edit: June 21, 2018, 04:05:36 PM by worldofsand »

Krath

  • Posts: 2432
Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
« Reply #39 on: June 21, 2018, 04:12:48 PM »
To address some previous posts:
Krath / XD: Seems like you are talking about certain play styles.  What would you choose for a noble?  Aide?  GMH Agent?

Touche...I also noticed some skills that are not listed on those guilds that balance it out..I think it will be fun.
Armageddon is best when it's actually harsh and brutal, not when we're only pretending that it is.

Brokkr

  • Administrator
  • Posts: 507
Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
« Reply #40 on: June 21, 2018, 04:25:20 PM »
My impression of the Soldier class is that it wasn't envisioned to be able to fulfil the militiaman law-enforcement "thief catcher". Instead it seems much better tooled towards a moderately self-sufficient combatant. Much like how the Mercenary subguild is. So the name is a bit of a misnomer.

The soldiers you see acting as law enforcement in, for example, Allanak, are a small portion of the total soldiers.  This was more oriented towards soldiers that are soldiers, rather than law enforcement.

Brokkr

  • Administrator
  • Posts: 507
Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
« Reply #41 on: June 21, 2018, 04:34:48 PM »
Lots of stuff, then...

For reference, this is what the new classes get:

Scan
advanced: raider, infiltrator, scout, pilferer, adventurer, dune trader,
master: miscreant, stalker, laborer

Hide
advanced: enforcer, raider, infiltrator, scout, pilferer, adventurer, fence
master: miscreant, stalker,

I spent a decent amount of time on stealth.  I even made an excel matrix that given certain variables, like relative hide/scan skill levels, would tell me exactly what was not detectable and what was, and the percentage for what was detectable.

I tried to do what I could without changing the actual code around stealth/detection.  Everyone having master hide is part of what makes scan at any other level not worthwhile.  Not everyone has master hide now.  Scout's hide is better than raider's hide.  Likewise, scout's scan is better than raider's scan.

Armaddict

  • Posts: 6127
Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
« Reply #42 on: June 21, 2018, 05:03:40 PM »
Disclaimer:
This is not really a criticism so much as it is a description of feedback I probably would have given.  I haven't done all the spreadsheet stuff, nor have I had beta testers.

When I read through the skills for the new classes, I'm kind of suffering through what I wouldn't describe as a dislike for many classes, but more of a 'I don't get it' or 'I'd never play that if I could play this other one' sort of feeling.  To me, it is coming across as the beta testing was done blindly, and by that I mean without an overall view of the other classes, and thus where the class they were testing comes into play.  SO.  This is less of a direct 'Put this skill here and remove this one' that I was doing, and describing what I think might be a good way to move forward with any changes that are desired.

General notes and tl/dr notes:
-I don't know skill levels.  I'm referring to things as (high master) or (middle master), just to provide a relationship between it and other skills for other classes at the same skill level.
-Subguilds should be revamped entirely to provide 2-4 skills at least journeyman in scope.  Delete extended and crafting subguilds entirely.
-Scan should only be present in the infiltrator class, row 2 and down of wilderness, and the general/city theme.
-Theme can be shown more clearly than what I've seen so far.  Mix up maxes of weapon types based on it, with general/city being free from theme but also limited by lack of theme.
-Theme should be strongest in rows 2 and 4, with 2 built around aggression and 4 built around self-sustenance or profit.  Combat is strongest, but with variance for flavor/rolebuilding, in row 1.  Mercantile is strongest, but with variance for flavor/rolebuilding, in row 5.
-Some rows naturally have more skills as they blend combat vs utility.  But if you have more skills, less of them, even the important ones, should reach master.  The shift from infiltrator to miscreant in current form is making infiltrator worse at everything that its skillset should be centered around if following theme.


Crafting:
I don't do much crafting, so largely, I am not doing direct critiques.
-Custom crafting should be main guild instead of the proposed subguild idea.  'Light mercantile' tier should be able to custom craft straightforward, functional things in their scope, not necessarily low quality or crude, but without bells and whistles and without exotics.  'Heavy mercantile' should be able to craft more exotic, 'flashy' types of things within their scope.
-Crafting above the 'mixed' tier (i.e. In light combat and heavy combat) should be subsistence based only.  They can craft things that keep their themed class going (i.e. Scout with fletchery), but not new items entirely (i.e. Enforcer with daggers).  We can add more subsistence crafting as desired in the future with weapons maintenance for each weapon type, etc.

THEMING:
Each of the themes needs to be highly differentiated from each other to define them as different, as well as preventing the 'This guy does everything' feel.  Criminal is set on manipulating advantage/disadvantage, Wilderness is set on mobility, and General effectively has higher maxes on everything combat, but lacks the 'theme-based' support/utility skills.  They are more subguild-friendly.  This theming comes through in some way as described below.

However, also importantly, 'Heavy Combat' classes are basically themed around combat, effectively it's own theme in different environments.  Their support/utility skills are selective and often limited, providing more for 'main approaches' to combat than making them able to serve super competently outside of a heavy combat role.  'Light combat' classes are essentially the epitome of using a theme to facilitate their combat.  Likewise, Heavy Mercantile moves largely out of scope, based on limited tools of utility and survival versus serving competently as that theme.

Weapon skills:
*I still think spears should be separated from piercing.
**Piercing is largely variable due to daggers being the main form of self defense
***Heavy Mercantile only ever receives Low Jman Piercing, with the exception of general/city.

This was one of my major head-scratchers.  I'd design this differently, providing 'tiers' for each of the x-axis theme, i.e.:
Criminal:  Tier 1: bludgeoning , Tier 2: slashing, Tier 3: chopping (piercing varies for each y-axis tier)
                -Heavy Combat: Bludgeoning (Master), Piercing (High Advanced) [Close in, brutal fighting suited for the poorer city folks]
                                        Slashing (Low-Middle Advanced) [Less ideal for tighter combat], Chopping (High Jman-Low Advanced)[Least ideal]
                -Light Combat:  Bludgeoning (Master)[Tier 1], Piercing (Master) [Bumped for themed combat]
                                        Slashing (Low-Middle Jman) [Tier 2], Chopping (NONE), [Tier 3]
                -Mixed:             Bludgeoning (Advanced)[Tier 1], Piercing (Advanced)[Bumped for themed combat]
                                        Slashing (None) [Tier 2], Chopping (None) [Tier 3]
                -Light Mercantile: Bludgeoning (High Jman), Piercing (High Jman)
     
Wilderness: Tier 1: Piercing, Tier 2: Bludgeoning, Tier 3: Chopping, Tier 4: Slashing
                -Heavy Combat: Piercing (High Master), Bludgeoning (High Advanced-Low Master), Chopping (High Advanced), Slashing (Low
                                         Advanced)
                - Light Combat: Piercing (Low-Middle Master), Bludgeoning (Middle Advanced-High Advanced), Chopping (Low Advanced), Slashing
                                        (High Jman)[Themed, swords are ideal mounted weapons and can be combined with mounted combat bonuses]
                - Mixed:            Piercing (Advanced), Bludgeoning (High Jman), Chopping (Low Jman)
                - Light Mercantile: Piercing (High Jman), Chopping (Low Jman)[Themed for woodworking]

General:  No tiers due to general theme, all weapon skills available will be of equal max
                -Heavy Combat: All (High Master)
                -Light Combat: All (Low Master)
                -Mixed: Slashing (Low Master), All else (Middle Advanced)
                -Light Mercantile:  Slashing (Low Advanced), All else (High Jman)
                -Heavy Mercantile: Slashing (Low Jman), Piercing (Middle Jman)

So, you can see what I mean by tiering.  With minor swaps, there is a steady decline in both the number of weapon skills, and their skill level, but it's kept in the tiering priority based on theme.  Wilderness/hunting is more biased to spears and piercing weapons than swords, due to what's available and what you encounter.

So you do the same with other skills.  However, the 'other' combat skills and utility skills need to be weighed out against each other.  I won't do an exhaustive list as much as I will a demonstration.
Combat Skills:
*Guard AND Rescue are proportionate to each other; Guard allows stopping someone in an alley, which is harder in the wilderness by and large, but the General/City Theme allows them to be equal to each other.
**Only the General/City Theme should have Hack and Riposte.


Criminal:  Tier 1: Disarm [Advantage/Disadvantage manipulation, CQC], Sap OR Backstab, Guard
               Tier 2: Kick, The other OR, Rescue, Parry
               Tier 3: Bash, etc
               Heavy: Disarm (Master), Sap (Master), Guard (Master), Backstab (Advanced/Jman), Kick (Advanced/Jman), Rescue (Advanced/Jman)
               Light: [This theme makes the Light combat more akin to current assassin] Disarm(Advanced), Backstab (Master), Sap (Master),
                        Guard/Rescue Nixxed or minimized
               ETC, with Theme first considered.

Wilderness: Tier 1: Charge, Rescue, Bash, Ride, Parry
                  Tier 2: Disarm, Kick, Guard
               ETC

General: Tier 1: Kick, Bash, Disarm, Guard, Rescue, Parry
             Tier 2: Ride
               ETC

Again, the general theme.  As you move from heavy to light to mercantile, you end up losing combat abilities as you move down, with minor variances made for role (for example, Scout might have better shield use than you'd imagine due to their prevalence performing -as- scouts in military units, which often use shields.  Otherwise, you largely see higher skill caps for dual-wield and two-handed in wilderness theme)

Utility Skills:
Now, I won't follow the same format for this.  I think you get the gist as far as tiering.  The big deal, is that the more combat capable the class is, the -stronger the theme for that combat should be-, while simultaneously getting -less of the themed skills-.  For example:

Enforcer gains hide.  They get it to Low Master or High Advanced.  But they do not get sneak.  They are the brutes, but often lie in wait for mugging or for their assigned quarry to arrive.  They are limited in utility outside of combat.
Infiltrator gains Hide and Sneak at Master.
Pilferer gets pick at master, steal at master, peek at master, and hide and sneak at advanced.  But as seen above, they sacrificed a lot of combat.
Only the Miscreant gets Hide, Sneak, Steal, Peek, Pick, and all else at advanced or lower master than the others without sacrificing their combat viability over the long term.

In this way, the 'theme' part of grows stronger on rows 2 and 4 of the 'grid', weaker on the heavy combat and mercantile tiers, and weaker on the mixed but with the true 'balance' of theme vs combat.  Likewise, the General classes all become more appealing to anyone wanting higher 'pure, unthemed' skills/combat skills and perception, with their theming coming in more minor degrees from a subguild.

I'm not sure if this is just a ramble.  But I do know that I see some things moving down from combat heavy to mixed in each 'theme' column that really...-really- surprised me, and made the Mixed row far too appealing in comparison with light combat and light mercantile.

Maybe I should write out full skill lists with explanations and see if that makes it make more sense.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2018, 06:49:18 PM by Armaddict »
She wasn't doing a thing that I could see, except standing there leaning on the balcony railing, holding the universe together. --J.D. Salinger

infinitehope

  • Posts: 27
Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
« Reply #43 on: June 21, 2018, 05:44:13 PM »
As one of the testers, i'll chime in about the starting levels for heavy combat skills:

Amazing. Thats simply it. The difference is huge, and noticeable, to the point where a fresh heavy combat was able to hold their own and last a while in a fight against a character of an older guild, that has been active and around, for a good bit. The character was maybe 8 hours played at the time. They still lost the fight, but they did far better that a fresh warrior would, from my observations

I'd also like to point something out, that brokkr clarified in one of the locked topics.

Ever since a recent change, Warriors weapon skills wouldn't go past advanced.

Heavy Combats get to master in weapon skills and a lot of thing. They essentially have the potential to be better fighters than warriors. The hard part is getting there.

Light combats are probably about comparable to a warrior, in terms of numbers and max potential.

As a result, its going to be really difficult to compare old guilds to the new classes, IMO. They're just so different that its hard.

As more characters roll in with the new classes, the scope of the game and how things are done.. in my opinon, I think its going to change the game massively and how people do things.

I'm excited for that.


Lizzie

  • Posts: 7724
Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
« Reply #44 on: June 21, 2018, 05:57:51 PM »
*Incoming long Armaddict post, READERS BEWARE!*

tl;dr

Carry on.
Talia said: Notice to all: Do not mess with Lizzie's GDB. She will cut you.
Delirium said: Notice to all: do not mess with Lizzie's soap. She will cut you.

X-D

  • Posts: 5517
Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
« Reply #45 on: June 21, 2018, 06:43:38 PM »
I would like to address these points.

Quote
Krath / XD: Seems like you are talking about certain play styles.  What would you choose for a noble?  Aide?  GMH Agent?

Noble, something with listen and scan and something to do, same as you do now...other then the need for high listen and scan it does not matter what you take for any of the currently open noble houses. Any of your city based light crafters with stealth and such...same as now. Aide, miscreant of course..with a crafting sub. Gmh agent, Heavy crafter(merchant), miscreant(assassin) or scout(ranger) with crafting sub...same as now. There is a reason why long time players make jokes about those roles and what class they are. Hey, the ivory skinned woman, fale aide, assassin or burgler? Nothing will change with the new classes. In fact, I bet that miscreant, as it sits right now will be the goto class for a VAST majority of those roles...with a crafting sub.


Quote
Armaddict / Vox:  Soooo, you want to remake assassin.  Sorry.  You get a guy that really knows combat and if he hits his backstab you are in trouble, but he has to find an opportunity to have his stealth work.  You have a guy that has a slightly broader toolset (poisons), can decently sneak and can decently fight.  And you have the guy that is an absolute ghost stealth wise, but is going to need to rely on their poisons and what not to finish off their target, most likely.

Realize none of those are the old assassin, they are intentionally created to not be.

I will address the bolded section first. As it is the crux of the problem I see with the new classes lineup. The tried and true method of balance in arm, what makes people need each other/other classes is the fact that each one is essentially the best at what they do but in a somewhat narrow scope, which is broadened or blurred with subclasses. You mentioned before that warriors for instance cannot even detect say assassins, like that is a bad thing. No, that is a good thing. Balance done by making people simply not that good or all essentially the same does not work. Being exceptional at what you do does...Knowing that in melee Nobody but another warrior stands a chance or in the alleys nobody but another assassin stands a chance...that is what actually works.

No veteran player is going to take Fighter for example, The trade is simply not worth it...slightly higher starting skills, hack and riposte and easier branches verses survival skills, perception skills, stealth etc...not a good trade when you know you are in for the long haul anyway. Especially when you can simply take slipknife on raider and outdoorsman on enforcer. And who is going to take Infiltrator over miscreant? Everybody knows that many of the skills that they both get, anything less then master is essentially worthless or death sentence. Just the fact that Infiltrator only gets advanced poison and no brew skill means it is out for many.

I state again. As far as the new classes go today, Once the new has worn off...say 6 months after they go live, a VAST majority of classes in game, and I mean between 90 and 95% And 95-100% with people who have played more then two years will be Raider/enforcer (same class in my opinion) Scout(with a crafting sub), miscreant(with an aggressor sub) and Craftsperson with either protector sub or a sub with high skinning.
Four classes.

This is why I wondered if staff planned on taking out mundane subclasses...it is the only way many of the new classes have any legs at all. (disclaimer) No I am not advocating the removel of subclasses. (in before the outcry)
« Last Edit: June 21, 2018, 06:51:45 PM by X-D »
A gaunt, yellow-skinned gith shrieks in fear, and hauls ass.
Lizzie:
If you -want- me to think that your character is a hybrid of a black kryl and a white push-broom shaped like a penis, then you've done a great job

Armaddict

  • Posts: 6127
Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
« Reply #46 on: June 21, 2018, 06:51:41 PM »
Quote
Armaddict / Vox:  Soooo, you want to remake assassin.  Sorry.  You get a guy that really knows combat and if he hits his backstab you are in trouble, but he has to find an opportunity to have his stealth work.  You have a guy that has a slightly broader toolset (poisons), can decently sneak and can decently fight.  And you have the guy that is an absolute ghost stealth wise, but is going to need to rely on their poisons and what not to finish off their target, most likely.

Wholly untrue.  I want a light-combat option that fits within the criminal theme.  'Mixed' entails mixture between combat and non-combat, which means giving it access to the best of both non-combat and combat options is essentially removing the need to ever be an infiltrator or pilferer.

Edit:  For more clarification, infiltrator is actually based in aggressive action.  Cutting out their ability to subsist out of aggression reliably makes them act within role.  In its current state, miscreant is better than either of its adjacents in anything but what boils down to crafting rather than theming.  Make the pilferer the resource-based rogue, the infiltrator the aggression-based rogue, and the miscreant the guy who supports either of them.  The 'mixed' portion of the criminal theme is particularly, overwhelmingly capable at anything except joining the Byn, and they're not even bad at that.

Edit again:  Furthermore, I find it odd that one of your objectives was to eliminate class-roles similar to what we have.  Are assassin or ranger types suddenly out of the theme of the game, while burglar/pickpocket/assassin was way better?  Did we need a warrior/assassin and merchant/burglar more?
« Last Edit: June 21, 2018, 07:01:30 PM by Armaddict »
She wasn't doing a thing that I could see, except standing there leaning on the balcony railing, holding the universe together. --J.D. Salinger

Brokkr

  • Administrator
  • Posts: 507
Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
« Reply #47 on: June 21, 2018, 07:21:42 PM »
What I find funny is the reason Miscreant still has backstab is that I figured everyone would scream outrage if I put forward classes where no one with backstab got master level sneak skills.

X-D

  • Posts: 5517
Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
« Reply #48 on: June 21, 2018, 07:26:20 PM »
Not one I care about...backstab been so gimped over the years anyway. :)
A gaunt, yellow-skinned gith shrieks in fear, and hauls ass.
Lizzie:
If you -want- me to think that your character is a hybrid of a black kryl and a white push-broom shaped like a penis, then you've done a great job

Delirium

  • Helper
  • Posts: 11903
Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
« Reply #49 on: June 21, 2018, 07:28:12 PM »
IMO, the best way to figure out what works and what doesn't is going to be through play.

It's hard to tell how well classes will/won't work until (multiple) players have had the chance to test them out.

I think miscreant having backstab makes sense, but time will tell.
Will they tell your story in the end?
Who lives, who dies, who tells your story?