Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
ACE_JackalBark

ACE Q&A for December - Official Discussion Thread

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Anhrez said:

I still need more understanding on the armor change ... I get the shift in what leather gets you versus plate but my questions are:

  • how does this benefit the gatherers or make the crafters more vital to the game? 
  • why do plate users get the less effort path to move from leather to plate but default leather wearers take a hit on the need for passives
  • does this feel like a needed fix to combat that somehow limits crafting complexity and value?

 

Personally, I think tying tiers of protection to disciplines is not a good idea. I would completely understand if the disciplines offered anything beside access to the armor. The benefits and drawbacks of armor should be an affect upon equip and players should have the freedom to choose which benefits or drawbacks match their build design. Otherwise we are going to see much more of a cookie cutter approach to build philosophy due to the efficiency of discipline slots.

Maybe I am looking at this the wrong way, though. I feel in the current state of the game that some minor slots aren't even being utilized because a build can be achieved after most major and weapon disciplines are equipped due to there being such limited skill bar space/passive loadouts... However, I recognize I don't fully understand the thought behind this system or why it had to go this direction.

Edited by Taimerow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A piece of feedback on the Minor discipline armor decisions:

Personally, I found this fairly disappointing. If I am hearing correctly, every class gets leather or better as base. You can use minor disciplines to alter what options you have for armor. I have no problem with minor disciplines for equipping different armor, I think it's a fine strategy.

My problem is the implication of a hard metric leather < mail < plate. Much preferable would be that each has significant advantages and disadvantages and our choice of how to build a character would drive, and be implicated in, our choice of what type of armor to go for. I thought that the soft hierarchy between armor types was what we had and where we were going, so I was disappointed to hear that plate is considered "better" armor.

I hope I am interpreting things wrong.


Mic MWH, Member of Mithril Warhammers since 2003,


Hammers High! http://www.mithrilwarhammers.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, McTan said:

I hope I am interpreting things wrong.

You are definetly not, it was told (with practically the same words) in the previous video.

Though you know, plate has no damage stats, while leather and mail have. It's more the matter of choice what will you prefer: to deal damage or to live better.

Edited by Niennah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Niennah said:

You are definetly not, it was told (with practically the same words) in the previous video.

Though you know, plate has no damage stats, while leather and mail have. It's more the matter of choice what will you prefer: to deal damage or to live better.

That's what I thought, which makes it more interesting to me if each class has given access to only one type of armor (corresponding to their basic "role") and then can use minors to gain access to another type, if they are building something unique out of the base class (a heal templar or bard champion, etc.).


Mic MWH, Member of Mithril Warhammers since 2003,


Hammers High! http://www.mithrilwarhammers.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also a small idea regarding naming of resources: how about tooltip for all the currently "basic" resources calling them "crude." For example, slag tooltip says it is "Crude Ore." Then the basic recipes use "Crude Ore" and the intermediate and advanced simply use "Ore."

A small change, but aesthetically I like the no adjective version for the more important recipes, that also can take in multiple types of the same resource (iron, copper, gold, etc. = "Ore"). "Non-basic" is a little cluttered for my taste.

Edited by McTan

Mic MWH, Member of Mithril Warhammers since 2003,


Hammers High! http://www.mithrilwarhammers.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, McTan said:

That's what I thought, which makes it more interesting to me if each class has given access to only one type of armor (corresponding to their basic "role") and then can use minors to gain access to another type, if they are building something unique out of the base class (a heal templar or bard champion, etc.).

Oh yeah, 1000% agree. I love healers in heavy. ^^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Jah said:

That "reticle priority" is supposed to be in game already.

Ah was not aware.  Well i am glad they are trying something like that, but i think it clearly needs fine tuning.  There are countless well documented videos where you simply cannot hit the target your reticle is hovering over because there is another closer target that "intercepts" the shot due to the huge size of raycast. 

 

I would much prefer aim assist basically be removed entirely, but i could live with a system where you can at least hit what your aiming at.  If the current iteration is final, sadly i just dont think i could enjoy the games combat enough to stick around. 

Edited by Sekcbaba

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 20.12.2017 at 7:38 AM, yiannit said:

I'm a one of the people who thinks it's okay , but that's just due to a physical disability . Although I think I can still be able to be decent if it's smaller . it would take more practice 

More practice can be good for you, isn't it?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/19/2017 at 12:17 PM, Anhrez said:

I still need more understanding on the armor change ... I get the shift in what leather gets you versus plate but my questions are:

  • how does this benefit the gatherers or make the crafters more vital to the game? 
  • why do plate users get the less effort path to move from leather to plate but default leather wearers take a hit on the need for passives
  • does this feel like a needed fix to combat that somehow limits crafting complexity and value?

 

I’m not sure the question “how does this benefit harvesters” is really the right question to ask. This change wasn’t made in regards to harvesters nor should it be in my opinion.  Plate wearers have less effort because it makes sense in reality. If you can wear heavy plate armor you can wear lighter armor. But if you are a leather armor class then by design you are usually more agile and mobile. You have to wear leather to keep that mobility. They could design it so everybody can wear everything but then why have armor classes to begin with. The other option is they physically make you slower the heavier you armor is. This is something I’ve been in favor of but most people are not.

As a light armor class you need to sacrifice something to move up. Plate wearers are sacrificing survivability the move down into the lighter armor classes. The system works and logically makes sense. You have to have some type of cost associated to moving outside your classes designed armor type and they have delivered on that. On the surface one might assume there is no cost associated with plate wearers moving down but it’s there. 

This was a great change.

 


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Tark said:

I’m not sure the question “how does this benefit harvesters” is really the right question to ask. This change wasn’t made in regards to harvesters nor should it be in my opinion.  Plate wearers have less effort because it makes sense in reality. If you can wear heavy plate armor you can wear lighter armor. But if you are a leather armor class then by design you are usually more agile and mobile. You have to wear leather to keep that mobility. They could design it so everybody can wear everything but then why have armor classes to begin with. The other option is they physically make you slower the heavier you armor is. This is something I’ve been in favor of but most people are not.

As a light armor class you need to sacrifice something to move up. Plate wearers are sacrificing survivability the move down into the lighter armor classes. The system works and logically makes sense. You have to have some type of cost associated to moving outside your classes designed armor type and they have delivered on that. On the surface one might assume there is no cost associated with plate wearers moving down but it’s there. 

This was a great change.

 

I'm looking at this a little differently.  When the system is put in place as described plate wearers can keep their plate chest, put on leather helm, gloves, and boots.  This will keep their mitigations high as a plate wearer but the dmg will be about 10% higher and require no disciplines to do so.  They will be sacrificing HP, but how much HP?  If it brings them down to like 4.5k - 5k they will have the advantage of higher mitigations but the same damage bonuses that leather wearers get.... at zero discipline cost.

Leather wearers on the other hand not only will have to give up the damage bonus from leather, but will have to give up 2 minor disciplines to wear plate.  So they will be potentially sacrificing about 30% of their damage to wear full plate. Seems a little out of whack to me.  They could also just throw the plate chest on, and continue to wear the leather helm, gloves, and boots.  But they have to sacrifice 2 minors to do so and will potentially lose out on about 20% dmg.  It really depends on how much HP the helm, gloves, and boots have... but it still seems to favor plate wearers at face value with no indication of how much HP/Dmg bonus these other pieces give.

I would rather it just be a free choice on which armour people want to wear. 

Edited by Destrin

"Float like a Butterfly.... Sting like a Misplaced Decimal Point" - Xarrayne 2018

YouTube Channel

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Destrin said:

I'm looking at this a little differently.  When the system is put in place as described plate wearers can keep their plate chest, put on leather helm, gloves, and boots.  This will keep their mitigations high as a plate wearer but the dmg will be about 10% higher and require no disciplines to do so.  They will be sacrificing HP, but how much HP?  If it brings them down to like 4.5k - 5k they will have the advantage of higher mitigations but the same damage bonuses that leather wearers get.... at zero discipline cost.

Leather wearers on the other hand not only will have to give up the damage bonus from leather, but will have to give up 2 minor disciplines to wear plate.  So they will be potentially sacrificing about 30% of their damage to wear full plate. Seems a little out of whack to me.  They could also just throw the plate chest on, and continue to wear the leather helm, gloves, and boots.  But they have to sacrifice 2 minors to do so and will potentially lose out on about 20% dmg.  It really depends on how much HP the helm, gloves, and boots have... but it still seems to favor plate wearers at face value with no indication of how much HP/Dmg bonus these other pieces give.

I would rather it just be a free choice on which armour people want to wear. 

You are making a lot of assumptions there. The new design is good. Numbers can be changed to balance. But giving free reign for all classes without an opportunity cost is awful design. 


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tark said:

You have to have some type of cost associated to moving outside your classes designed armor type and they have delivered on that. On the surface one might assume there is no cost associated with plate wearers moving down but it’s there. 

 

 

I guess we can disagree .. I ask the question about harvesters/crafters as we keep hearing how important they are to the 'synergy' of the system and I can't tell how it impacts us but I will keep asking. The changes discussed on the stream about moving to the chest peice for targeting? Stat Sticks for the side pieces all of that adds questions to the value of crafters and the gathers that support them.

Sacrifice?  Plate wears get to Choose to drop the safety of their free plate wearing to Choose to try and attempt at more DPS. They are choosing to move away from the base design. That is a cost of sorts..  Leather wears have to Sacrifice passive slots to Choose to move away from DPS to attempt more survive-ability.  So we have 2 players attempting to move away from their base character design ... but one loses a lot more then the other? 

I agree with your concept that costs are needed but right now the costs are all on the choice of non-plate wearers. From the beginning we have heard and understood that all classes can't have the same healing, same DPS. But maybe ... just maybe we can have some parity of costs and choices? 

Edited by Anhrez

Don't forget, the one EK that no one will judge you for looting your guilds treasury is Anhrez's Doober Shack. Where you can take those long con gains and 'simplify' them to more easily fit in your inventory. While you are unloading your hard earned winnings, swing by the Bazaar and pick up something to celebrate your genius.

LR0tCJt.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Tark said:

You are making a lot of assumptions there. The new design is good. Numbers can be changed to balance. But giving free reign for all classes without an opportunity cost is awful design. 

But giving free reign to two classes is okay?

from your other comment you posted in the wrong thread:

3 minutes ago, Tark said:

You can’t just have free choice without oppotunity cost. A ranger shouldn’t get plate and not have to give something back in return. Choices without consequence is boring. Metal armor makes sound in reality, a stealther shouldn’t get plate by default because they would make sound. The game isn’t based on reality so you add a cost to these to simulate the same idea. 

I would argue that why should Chain and Plate wearers get the free option for more dmg, when leather wearers get no free option to have more hp or mit.   The cost is built in to the selection of armour they choose. Give up HP for more DMG.  Leather wearers do not get the free option to give up dmg for HP.  They have to double their sacrifice and equip minors.  If they are going to keep it this way they should make it so plate wearers can only wear chain without a disc... if they want leather, they have to put on a disc to do so.  They should also give leather wearers the innate option for chain.  Or.... just make it free choice...

The only downside to free choice is that leather wearers would ALWAYS wear a plate chest and probably leather helm, gloves and boots.  Unless of course there is a dmg bonus stat on the chest as well, but from how they described the system that is not the case.

 


"Float like a Butterfly.... Sting like a Misplaced Decimal Point" - Xarrayne 2018

YouTube Channel

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God Dammit @Tark you made me agree with @Destrin ... I doubt my soul will ever feel clean again ........ 


Don't forget, the one EK that no one will judge you for looting your guilds treasury is Anhrez's Doober Shack. Where you can take those long con gains and 'simplify' them to more easily fit in your inventory. While you are unloading your hard earned winnings, swing by the Bazaar and pick up something to celebrate your genius.

LR0tCJt.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/20/2017 at 9:30 AM, Sekcbaba said:

Ah was not aware.  Well i am glad they are trying something like that, but i think it clearly needs fine tuning.  There are countless well documented videos where you simply cannot hit the target your reticle is hovering over because there is another closer target that "intercepts" the shot due to the huge size of raycast. 

That's not the case anymore. If a single target ability strikes multiple targets (due to the very wide raycast width) then it will take whatever target is closest to your crosshair. 

You can see this in this video towards the end when I'm firing at an angle at the target dummies.

 


Blazzen <Lords of Death>

YouTube - Twitch - Website

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Destrin said:

But giving free reign to two classes is okay?

from your other comment you posted in the wrong thread:

I would argue that why should Chain and Plate wearers get the free option for more dmg, when leather wearers get no free option to have more hp or mit.   The cost is built in to the selection of armour they choose. Give up HP for more DMG.  Leather wearers do not get the free option to give up dmg for HP.  They have to double their sacrifice and equip minors.  If they are going to keep it this way they should make it so plate wearers can only wear chain without a disc... if they want leather, they have to put on a disc to do so.  They should also give leather wearers the innate option for chain.  Or.... just make it free choice...

The only downside to free choice is that leather wearers would ALWAYS wear a plate chest and probably leather helm, gloves and boots.  Unless of course there is a dmg bonus stat on the chest as well, but from how they described the system that is not the case.

 

Yeah I don’t know why it posted in that thread. I was in this thread when I hit reply. 

Yes giving a Templar free reign is acceptable because they are a class that is designed around wearing plate armor. It makes sense you can move down but not up. My character is strength based and therefore strong and can wear heavier armor. Where as some of the other classes rely more on quickness and precision or intellect but lack physical strength. Wearing heavier armor on the weaker classes is more taxing and therefore more resources (in this case, minor disciplines) must be allocated to  make up for the deficiency. Also my Templar is actually stronger when wearing leather because I don’t have to bear the weight burden of wearing plate this is why I get a damage bonus. If I can wear plate then it’s no sweat that I can wear a lighter armor. 

You might think  this is silly but game design has revolved around this type of design before video games were a thing. It’s not a question of fairness. The fairness comes into play with balancing the numbers. If you want to wear plate without having to give up disciplines then play a class that can do that. 

Im currently training a frostweaver and confessor and instead of training damage I’m going down the tank trees. I do this knowing I’ll be giving up minor disciplines. I look at it as these are ranged classes that are somewhat mobile which gives me an upper hand already. I’m now going to trade my damage for some survuvability but I’m hoping that I can sit in these big melee balls and churn out CC without the worry of being instagibbed. I have no issues giving up these disciplines because I think a plate frostweaver will be strong in its own right and the opportunity cost is worth it. 

I know I don’t have to tell you, but damage isn’t everything. If you are wanting to use plate then damage isn’t your goal and you are planning to use some other tactic as a means to your end. 


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...