Tree of Savior Forum

Low Rank Clasess fall off

Gameplay Feedback General Feedback
#11

basically u want a scaled skill.

i disagree. the ones that stay relevant (CC-cyromancer, wiz3-%dps, linker, chrono at least for wizards) are harder to level and the players who go that path should be rewarded.
well whats funny is that i was a pyro main and in the wiz tree of dpsers only pyro fall off in damage (aand maybe thauma) so it hurts me. as a solo pyro, linker is a must to keep up dps, and taking 2 ranks linker hurts as i cant take more dps classes.
also because of flame ground slow ticks and pillar’s 2m cd.wtf.

#12

I also plan a Wiz-Pyro3-Cryo3 (for Role Play basicaly) but seems that EVERYONE agrees that pyro3 is almost completely useless in late game… That means any late game DPS build should just pick wiz3 and good support classes until rank 7, and could be even worse at rank 9-10… And I’m one of those people that like the early rank classes but don’t like the rank 7 classes… Still waiting for the Enchanter and Sage…

#13

Harder to level classes being those that stay relevant… good point. And I do like that idea a lot.
But isn’t the gap between similar rank classes that stay useful and ones that become useless too big at least?

And back to my “let’s incentivize diversity in builds”-line of thought (unless it’s just me who thinks it’d be fun).
Looking at that case the same way: Picking an early-dps class at a later rank is arguably the “hardest” path, but it’s also the least rewarding, as the class is inherently inferior and therefore was only a viable option if taken early when it was unlocked. Any ideas how that could be changed in some other way?

(I’ve only come up with some kind of scaling. With say each new Rank offering you an attribute that adds +x% on damaging skills from classes unlocked from lower ranks or something)

#14

i think adding more things to balance would be hard for those poor devs working 24/7 to get this game released. (sarcasm)

its true it would add diversity…i gotta think a bit…
the game is designed to go forward without looking back. its true going back to lower classes will be a setback.

lets make some examples:
swordsman goes swords>pelt>hop3>doppel>dragoon
however he wants to go back and get high2 for skyliner
he would have to sacrifice 2 ranks (8-9) for 1 move. this makes no sense.
or, (this was mentioned in another post)
swordsman, same build, wants to pick up a hidden class rank3 in exchange for rank 8. this case the swordsman has the choice of rank8 or rank3. thats no problem. if he wants both, you probably need another character anyway.

in the first case, i feel like if u need to go back u planned the character wrong. if u went full support and want to take damage lower ranks, dont expect to have a huge boost of 5k dmg per hit in a lvl 5 thrust, lvl 5 fireball. thats your choice, the game moves forward. you can take a dmg class rank 7+

#15

I think they should just buff Rank 1~3 classes after C2. It’s absurd that while a Barbarian (Rank 4) deals 1K per skill, swordman C3 or HL C3 at same level deals half of it… 50% difference in power is absurd.

Doesn’t help that Dragon Gael Burg deals 7x more damage than any early class skill.

#16

They said the first few ranks are meant for beginners.
The problem is not buffing them, because you have nothing to compare (do you buff it up to level 300? Level 500? Level 600? There is no limit).

What they need to do is to ensure skills are scaled with stats. However, the stats itself is not properly designed, so they simply cannot scale and balance. It is a design flaw.

I am still looking for feedback on some new stats idea (for this game or not) if anyone want to contribute: Suggestion for Base Stats

1 Like
#17

I dont like the idea of have useless low rank skills. Those ranks need to have something that helps later, which doenst need to be pure damage, but a damage buff or a mechanical skill like shield buck., cross guard and CC. Right now, SwordC3 doesnt offer much of those things… And thats IS a issue.

#18

hmm for starters damage wiz
damage wiz only has pyro link, psycho ice fb combo, wiz3 elem3. thats literally it. 7/14 red symbols but only 3 solid builds. wiz has lot more support/utility classes and choices. as a dps wiz main im disappointed. 2/3 are burst, long cd. 1/3 low dmg.

swords has 9 red classes/14. of course some are weak.
however some attacking classes suffer 3 star dungeons making tank meta late game. but if its tank meta late game it lacks defensive classes. all the dps swords get screwed if they dont build right. however 1 point in pelt 1 and they are still useful.

archers are getting % buffs which means they are going to be late game dps dealers.8/13 attack, the limited build are small however. some classes are utility, making these classes weak and since they dont really help these classes struggle. however if they are paired up with these strong dps builds, they might be weaker, but still okay.

clerics have 4/14 dps 1 tank though. they builds are diverse as they are not pressured to dps. and even dps moves scale with int. they are not in a bad spot

in the end game it expects
swords 1/3 dps 2/3 tank role
wizards 3/4 dps 1/4 support utility roles
archers 100% dps role
clerics 4/5 support 1/5 dps role

however the reality of the class distribution is that
swords 4/5 dps 1/5 tank (although any pelt 1 can tank)
and swords fall in dps late game
wizards 1/4 dps 3/4 support utility
archers 3/4 dps 1/4 support
clerics 1/3 dps 2/3 support
clerics need dps to lvl, those who go full sup suffers

3 Likes
#19

I agree. I think people may argue that you can pick on the classes that does the job. However, I don’t find it smooth on picking them. For example, taking Cleric all healing abilities, you do not feel you are really playing/positioning as a healer role. Playing Wizards do not feel you are the glass canon. Maybe it is just me.

#20

They could make it that going further into a class circle tree unlocks more damage% attributes. Like C1 100 C2 125 C3 150.

#21

Or they could use modifiers that grow with your character.

Skill damage x rank
Skill damage x character lv
Skill damage x weapon lv

Not that hard to think off.

#22

Or they could just add Multipliers depending which type of skill it is.

Balancing Rules:

  1. Lower the class, Higher the multiplier.
  2. Higher the skill Circle, Higher the multiplier.
  3. GREEN skills have CON/SPR multpliers.
  4. RED skills have STR/INT multipliers.
  5. BLUE skills have DEX/CHAR LVL multipliers.
  6. RED mult = SKILL DAMAGE x [ 1 + (STR x 0,10) + (INT x 0,15) + C + c ]
  7. BLUE mult = COOLDOWN x [ 1 - (DEX x 0,10) - (LVL x 0,05) - C - c ]
  8. GREEN mult = SKILL SP COST x [ 1 - ((CON+SPR) x 0,15) - C - c ]
  9. C = Class multiplier ( Lower Class, Higher value ) / c = Circle multiplier ( Higher circle, Higher value )

GREEN SKILL EXAMPLES:


BLUE SKILL EXAMPLES:


RED SKILL EXAMPLES:


#23

TBH the idea of lower classes becoming useless besides their support uses kinda ruins the whole build system of the game, especially in the case of DPS builds, doesn’t it? Any freedom dies and everyone has to choose between awful DPS and viable support for over 200 levels or OK DPS for your level that falls off before you even reach the classes that actually matter for damage, which would be rank 7+. Once you reach rank 7+, everyone will be using the same skills for damage anyhow so any build ideas you had up to that point are irrelevant unless they have support viability to work around those rank 7+ skills. Doesn’t that kinda ruin the idea of freedom in the builds if you HAVE to make a build around supporting rank 7+ skills that you may or may not even like?

9 Likes
#24

Agreed… I was looking at builds to play on OBT, but the more I look, more I lose hope, why would I build C3 with any class if Dragoon skills deal 7x damage of any other LVL 15 C3 skills?

=/ Hope they address this issue ASAP… or they may change their AD from 80 classes to play to 79 useless class and 1 better than the others.

5 Likes
#25

You don’t understand.
All spells should scale better, not just selected 1 or 3 from each class.

A ranger has 45% dmg bonus to all attacks, thats correct, but all other spells of ranger will be unused past r6/7 because they will lack of dmg in comparison to higher ranks.

Full draw was also bad example. It doesn’t scale well, its just utility spell and as such it can be used at higher levels regardless of being completly weak and unreliable for dmg source. Multi shot doesn’t scale well either, however the nature of multi hits makes it viable option to keep.

If all attacks would gain more dmg with level of the character, then i would call them all good.

Tell me that c3 archer, c3 ranger with, say, c3 scout would be viable option when we get rank 9. Of course it won’t unless IMC do something to make lower ranks more interesting. Otherwise we will be forced to use highest rank class and forget about the past. As if we were not meant to build a mix of classes we like, but rather get to the top rank with anything you think is fun and then ditch all of its spells, except maybe some ulitility and buffs (and multi hits).

So clearly they need to improve earlier ranks.

3 Likes
#26

What have I said about scaling, it was something like this
Skill Damage = 100 + (50 * skill level * class cicle) for example

Or even put the current rank at multiplier formula, so lower rank classes would still be doing some damage at later levels, but higher rank classes have a higher constant, so lower rank classes wouldn’t outdamage higher rank classes but still be viable

2 Likes
#27

The other side of this problem is that your defenses get left behind.

1 Like
#28

+1 :heart:

My thoughts exacly…

3 Likes
#29

Or they can make C3 only skill more powerful (big blast). You only get 3 C3 classes, and there are only 1 for each. This should give people incentive to build it up instead of no diversity to classes.

1 Like
#30

Then let me ask the reverse.

In case your wish is granted.

Why bother taking high rank classes if their attributes will cost way more and the damage will be ‘similar’ anyway since by your complaint, all low rank skills should scale to be on par with high rank or they’ll be ignored.

As for Archer 3, Ranger 3, Scout 3 being viable? In a way yes.
You have the +50% crit chance on critical shot as the auto-attack, damage buff in Steady Aim, AoE with Bounce Shot and Splt Arrow.
And with the multi-hit power of Flare Shot, Spiral Arrow and Multishot.

Is it the most DPS setup? No, of course not, or rather, it should be obvious when there’s SCOUT in the class list that it’s not a build min-maxing DPS.