mehtastic
GDB Superstar
Armers Anonymous sponsor
Posts: 1,699
Member is Online
|
Post by mehtastic on Jul 21, 2018 13:52:45 GMT -5
The old guild system wasn't great but there was at least a sense of class identity. There's no class identity here, and there's a major overlap between the classes that makes it confusing to figure out where and when these classes shine. I think it's going to be more off-putting to new players than anything as they have to suss over lists of skills to figure out what differences there actually are. This may turn out to be a valid criticism. I dislike muds when I log on and in character creation I'm presented with 38 classes, 19 races, and a complex background generation. Too complex ... need my ranger. #zap I think they could help this by deciding which classes would be most suited to newbies and pointing towards that in chargen. **If you're a newbie, these 3 classes are best suited for you. Not sure which those would be. Adventurer is a great a la cart class that gives you a taste of everything. Miscreant is really good for city people. Social types might steer towards laborer. Soldier looks like it has some range as well. This is a good point. They would have been able to achieve the same scale with just nine classes. They didn't need the "heavy" combat and mercantile classes. Those are as undefined as the old warrior and merchant classes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2018 16:06:54 GMT -5
A three shot killing machine against whom? A combat versus non-combat will be easier, maybe, but you're going to run into far fewer of those no-skill merchants to pulverize. When the new classes are running into mostly other new classes, won't this perceived "balance" problem be sorted out? Against any non hg pc with less than 20d played.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2018 16:14:19 GMT -5
This may turn out to be a valid criticism. I dislike muds when I log on and in character creation I'm presented with 38 classes, 19 races, and a complex background generation. Too complex ... need my ranger. #zap I think they could help this by deciding which classes would be most suited to newbies and pointing towards that in chargen. **If you're a newbie, these 3 classes are best suited for you. Not sure which those would be. Adventurer is a great a la cart class that gives you a taste of everything. Miscreant is really good for city people. Social types might steer towards laborer. Soldier looks like it has some range as well. This is a good point. They would have been able to achieve the same scale with just nine classes. They didn't need the "heavy" combat and mercantile classes. Those are as undefined as the old warrior and merchant classes. I think this is a very good point. Perhaps the new system should also come with a disclaimer not to select anything above the second level of the chart (from the bottom) until you play a pc who gets a weapon skill to advanced. There is probably a more politic way to say it, but miscreant / stalker / laborer is probably all 99.9% of newbs need to see the game and get a good grounding. How many newbs will see master weapon skills on their first or even third pc? How many will be more restricted by a lack of range of skills, than empowered by a few additional points of base O and D?
|
|
|
Post by shakes on Jul 21, 2018 16:40:34 GMT -5
Not everyone plays Arm to "win" at PK. This doesn't make those lesser combat classes bad in any way. They're subpar to a higher combat class BUT the higher combat classes offer little EXCEPT top-end combat.
You want something to do for the other 59 minutes while you're waiting for your skill timer ... those other classes are the best option for you.
|
|
|
Post by jcarter on Jul 21, 2018 17:40:56 GMT -5
Not everyone plays Arm to "win" at PK. This doesn't make those lesser combat classes bad in any way. They're subpar to a higher combat class BUT the higher combat classes offer little EXCEPT top-end combat. You want something to do for the other 59 minutes while you're waiting for your skill timer ... those other classes are the best option for you. fair enough, but the 'utility' offered by other skills is minimal at best, and the utility can be regained by selecting a subclass. compare enforcer to soldier. you're trading a lot of combat prowess for...bandagemaking and weaponcrafting. On a whole, the crafting skills in Arm are useless and lackluster. Even moreso when they're handed out so freely. Or compare pilferer to miscreant. Miscreant gets higher levels of sneak, hide, listen, peek, scan, and climb plus starts with steal whereas pilferer has to branch it. Miscreant also gets poison. What does pilferer get as master level? Clothworking, knife making, and stoneworking and can branch more crafting skills. Why would anyone ever pick pilferer over miscreant w/crafting subguild or just being a better merchant class? It offers nothing unique. The matrix that Nergal made, and the rest of the staff followed through with, was stupid and arbitrary. Look at this thing. Does there really need to be criminal (city), wilderness, and general instead of wilderness vs urban? Why are there five 'competencies' instead of three? What niche does light mercantile fill? Crafting is such a small and insignificant part of Arm that devoting SIX guilds to it is pointless. I can't think of any other game in existence that has followed such a plan for class design and archetypes. And having subclasses that players pick from makes it even stupider. Why do you need such fine gradation between main classes when you have 20+ subclasses that can fill in gaps between them?
|
|
|
Post by lechuck on Jul 21, 2018 18:10:19 GMT -5
Noone can seriously claim that the purpose of this class overhaul was to make characters start off a bit better than before. If that was really the goal, they could have just raised the starting skills of the existing guilds. I stand by my assertation that the whole thing is the result of staff feeling the need to "do something" but lacking the imagination or sheer interest to do something useful.
It certainly isn't a matter of realism. An RPI having a class system at all in 2018 is a bit of a joke. I can't even begin to imagine why they wouldn't have switched to a custom skill-picking system if they were going to make a big change anyway. Armageddon has always been hindered by its class system which interferes with so many aspects of the game for no good reason.
I'm pretty sure Arm's staff community is wildly dishonest about how many active staff members there are. The roster says something like sixteen, but let's be real, there's absolutely no way that sixteen staff members actively work on this game. It feels like five at most, and only some of them have any in-game presence. I get the impression that the majority of staff puts in a bare minimum of time to retain their titles and would never dream of devoting hours to player initiatives. That's why they're happy to sign off on a "class overhaul" that they don't need to worry about.
If this game had more than a select few staff members who gave a shit about anything, there wouldn't be several years between HRPTs, and people wouldn't be quitting in droves because they're tired of trying to play a roleplaying game with no semblance of story and plot. Those who remain are those who are delighted to see the original five classes split up into fifteen, of which about five are worth playing and the rest are useless filler.
Looking at these new classes, they look like they should have a taken a week's worth of man-hours to design and implement. Somehow it took two fucking years.
|
|
|
Post by shakes on Jul 21, 2018 18:13:27 GMT -5
I don't really see where they hit the mark with that matrix too well.
Miscreant is an all around good city-criminal class who starts right out of the box with the ability to criminate. Pilferer looks like something you'd do if you wanted a side gig as a Kadian. Bling crafter by day, no-good ne'er-do-well by night. Good luck with maintaining that cover the first time RNG doesn't favor your steal. I can't see ever going pilferer or fence if I have the karma for a master crafting subguild. But I think that's a personal choice.
Raider looks pretty nice to me. Not real sure why you'd ever pick fighter with those other options.
I'm hoping at some point they end up fine tuning these a little bit and giving each class something defining.
|
|
|
Post by sergeantraul on Jul 23, 2018 8:04:28 GMT -5
The two-axis thing isn't that bad an idea. The way it should have worked is that you have the two-axes, and moving towards more competency in one area means less competency in the other. You end up with 4 extreme, pure classes that are the best at what they do, and then you can put hybrid classes in between them. So instead of that table, it should be a chart that looks something like this (with the classes they made placed where they should go, not where they actually are): Moving from any place on the chart to any other place should require giving up expertise in one area in exchange for other expertise. Moving towards city or wilderness utility is less costly in combat prowess than moving towards mercantile, but there should still be a cost. It's just bad because they kinda did this in some places, and didn't in others. Miscreant is clearly the best at crime and stealth, and Stalker is clearly the best at wilderness survival, navigation and stealth. But classes like Raider and Enforcer don't really give up enough combat skill for the amount of utility they get, and the other classes that should be corner-adjacent (Infiltrator, Pilferer, Fence, Adventurer, and Scout) seems gimped because they didn't receive the same treatment. Also, I agree that 15 classes is too many; it would have worked a lot better with just 9. Merge Raider/Scout, Pilferer/fence, Enforcer/Infiltrator, Trader/Adventurer and delete Laborer. Though I don't get complaints about "flavor" or "identity" though. It makes sense they would want to move away from a system where your character felt totally defined by your class. Anyway, Armaddict made this argument so anyone who repeats it here is a tool.
|
|
|
Post by jcarter on Jul 23, 2018 14:30:48 GMT -5
Though I don't get complaints about "flavor" or "identity" though. It makes sense they would want to move away from a system where your character felt totally defined by your class. Anyway, Armaddict made this argument so anyone who repeats it here is a tool. The complaint about identity relates to figuring out what are the strengths and weaknesses of the classes. It was relatively simple before: warrior was great at fighting but had very poor utility. Ranger was decent at fighting and had wilderness-based utility; assassin was similar but city-based utility and reliance on stealth. Burglar/pickpocket were city-based thief characters. Merchant was a crafter. Characters were never totally defined by class thanks to the subclass system. Warriors could fill many roles thanks to subclasses. You could be a great fighter and mediocre crafter, for instance. Or, you could be a merchant with a combat subclass and be a great crafter and mediocre fighter. It covered down and allowed you to broaden out in whatever direction you wanted. Which is why having a huge number of main classes is stupid. As I said before, why do you need such gradation between main classes when you have subclasses to do that? Why would I ever pick 'soldier', for instance, instead of a better combat main class and a crafting subclass? That's the problem and what the complaint of class identity is about. It's hard to figure out what niche each of these classes actually fills and relies on substantial experience, whereas it was plainly obvious before.
|
|
tedium
Clueless newb
Posts: 164
|
Post by tedium on Jul 29, 2018 7:07:46 GMT -5
I think the lack of class identity is a double edged sword. Now you'll have less guild sniffing, but leaders will also have a much harder time knowing what their people can actually do. My other worry is that this will be an excuse not to raise clan caps because you can get a bunch of different half-roles in one person. Two people to a clan might satisfy staff when each one is 1/3rd of the three roles.
Having said that, there are still some things that make me scratch my head. Laborer is an absolute mess. Laborer is meant to be more mercantile than Soldier, but can't actually Mastercraft anything. It gets Master Scan, though? Which I guess is more mercantile oriented? It just makes no sense. It really needs a few Master Crafts to make up for the fact that it gives up Master Archery and other good combat skills in exchange for lumberjacking (as a city-based crafter? What?) and a handful of garbage crafts.
Among all the mixed classes, it's also the only one that can't forage food, sneak/hide, brew, poison, or hunt. I get that those skills don't make sense on an honest-to-goodness laborer, but it feels like it should have some utility to compensate for their absence. Language learning boost, food foraging, climb, and then a mastercraft or two (even if it's the rubbish ones like Clay) at least. Maybe an encumbrance or stat boost? As is, it's the "combat specialist" of the three mixed classes, but is outclassed by soldier in every way (except scan, listen, and bandage. Oh and clay working, can't forget clay working ) and doesn't get much utility to compensate.
|
|
|
Post by anaiahlation on Aug 5, 2018 3:43:58 GMT -5
Call it my inner cynic but I am pretty sure the entire reason for it is because the real skill trees got posted here. When the other two options were 1. Expect people to come here for the info, or 2. Post the info themselves and risk looking like they were goaded into it.
Just like the symbol command to give spell words was implemented player side (staff already had it) after the list of spell words copy and pasted from that very command was posted here. Rather than assign all new words, they gave the option of finding the info without needing to come here to do it.
|
|
mehtastic
GDB Superstar
Armers Anonymous sponsor
Posts: 1,699
Member is Online
|
Post by mehtastic on Aug 5, 2018 8:33:51 GMT -5
Call it my inner cynic but I am pretty sure the entire reason for it is because the real skill trees got posted here. When the other two options were 1. Expect people to come here for the info, or 2. Post the info themselves and risk looking like they were goaded into it. Just like the symbol command to give spell words was implemented player side (staff already had it) after the list of spell words copy and pasted from that very command was posted here. Rather than assign all new words, they gave the option of finding the info without needing to come here to do it. I'm sure that's at least a big part. But I think if it was a more prominent reason, the class change would have been more rushed. Instead, it was a 2-3 year long project. If it was a petty move, it was a very slow one.
|
|
|
Post by anaiahlation on Aug 5, 2018 12:41:12 GMT -5
The subguilds update took six years. Comparatively? Half the time for full guilds and then discontinuing all the old guilds whose skills were listed... Well. I don't know that holding true to an infamous level of delay means that it wasn't rushed, when the scope and size of the project is much larger and was done in a fraction of the time.
|
|
|
Post by lyse on Aug 5, 2018 15:09:40 GMT -5
Don't forget that Nergal left, that probably set them back quite a ways. I think you're right though anaiahlation part of the reason they did it probably was because the skills were listed here. Sirra posted his "How to Ranger" guide what? 2014? For the code leak, they pretty much nerfed everything that was in there. Stilt-lizards, riding etc. The thing that gets me is it's a pretty short term solution to spend so much time on.
|
|
|
Post by anaiahlation on Aug 5, 2018 16:26:32 GMT -5
It depends, if someone posts skill trees like that on the new classes, with hard numbers, at the very least, it dates that they were on staff after the change was implemented. I agree it is a non solution, but feel like it was meant more as a third option for them where the other two would have been to just post the skill trees for the classes or ignore it and see people come here to get them, secret option c both posts the skill trees and branching, /and/ invalidates our posted info, making the perusal of it here pointless. Honestly I think secret option c was pretty shrewd, but agree that it was a lot of time and effort to put into achieving it. The sole victory/plus about the new guilds (to me) is that so much is already there and thus doesn't require a grind, like the difference between the craft skill structure for artisan versus merchant would reflect.
I think that making custom crafting a subguild and then giving crafting skills to the majority of guilds hamstrings crafter type characters, but am glad you don't have to manufacture reasons to forage to branch most of your skill tree on characters that really have no business outside the gates.
|
|