James-Wayne wrote: »

Lets hope there are some major changes to better balance Templar abilities out, need to wait for PTS first...

There should be a really big change on skill lines that I think it will not happen, at least what I say of structure correctly the skill lines and roles.

I hope I will be wrong on this in favor of the game, we will see in a couple of hours.

James-Wayne wrote: »

Lets hope there are some major changes to better balance Templar abilities out, need to wait for PTS first...

Don't need to wait. You know they are going to nerf Jesus Beam bc/ ZOS is worried every other class will be using it.

RlyDontKnow wrote: »

Probably a wildly unpopular opinion, but: why does every class need to be exactly the same? What’s the point of having a “pure” damage/heal/tank line for all classes? As you said: if you have pure lines you give up on those things completely. You give away all your healing abilities. Or all your tanking. Or all your damage. But maybe people have a need for something in between. Maybe you’d like 2.5 damage lines and some tankiness or some more healing capabilities or whatever.
It seems a lot more useful to have some mixed skill lines than having pure ones on all classes out of which realistically only one combination (the one deemed to be the best) will be chosen, anyway.
If you give up on the idea that all classes should be equally good at all the things in all of PvE and PvP (which was never the case and which doesn’t seem like something to aim for, anyway) then having some variety in how skills are distributed among skill lines makes a lot of sense in my opinion.

So then why new classes have structured skill lines and older classes not? Also structured skill lines doesn't mean that all classes will be the same and I only point that this system with structured classes and non structured ones is unbalanced in favor of the structured ones in terms of dps/healing/tanking. That said, it would be better have all classes non structured or structured but not a mix in between.

RlyDontKnow wrote: »

Probably a wildly unpopular opinion, but: why does every class need to be exactly the same? What’s the point of having a “pure” damage/heal/tank line for all classes? As you said: if you have pure lines you give up on those things completely. You give away all your healing abilities. Or all your tanking. Or all your damage. But maybe people have a need for something in between. Maybe you’d like 2.5 damage lines and some tankiness or some more healing capabilities or whatever.
It seems a lot more useful to have some mixed skill lines than having pure ones on all classes out of which realistically only one combination (the one deemed to be the best) will be chosen, anyway.
If you give up on the idea that all classes should be equally good at all the things in all of PvE and PvP (which was never the case and which doesn’t seem like something to aim for, anyway) then having some variety in how skills are distributed among skill lines makes a lot of sense in my opinion.

I think a lot of ppl agree with your points but thats not the discussion here.
Sure i think its good if not every tree has a sole puropse like healing or damaging, but the problem here is that the new classes will just profit more/be more desireble than the old ones.
DD Arcanist can just swap out 2 of their trees without a downgrade in their damage, if a templar loses one of the three trees they lose at least one damage spell and damage passives. THATS the problem OP is hinting at

ZDunlain wrote: »

So then why new classes have structured skill lines and older classes not? Also structured skill lines doesn't mean that all classes will be the same and I only point that this system with structured classes and non structured ones is unbalanced in favor of the structured ones in terms of dps/healing/tanking. That said, it would be better have all classes non structured or structured but not a mix in between.

No, it wouldn't. If some are structured and some are not you have the full choice. You can fully spec into one way if you go for a class that has pure line.
But you can also spec into something more in between. You might not be able to do that well with one of the newer classes because you start from a pure skill line.

Iuppiterr wrote: »

I think a lot of ppl agree with your points but thats not the discussion here.
Sure i think its good if not every tree has a sole puropse like healing or damaging, but the problem here is that the new classes will just profit more/be more desireble than the old ones.
DD Arcanist can just swap out 2 of their trees without a downgrade in their damage, if a templar loses one of the three trees they lose at least one damage spell and damage passives. THATS the problem OP is hinting at

The problem you describe is only an issue if your goal is to have the most damage. Sure, if you're an endgame PvE DD aiming for trifectas that's likely your goal. If you're not: maybe having some utility like shields, self-heals, damage reduction from stuff like minor evasion, more resistances, etc. is actually tremendously useful because an alive DD does a lot more damage than a dead one. Just like having some sustain so you won't run out of ressources if you don't have all the guild passives, use all the synergies on cooldown, or maybe just have a non-optimal healer that doesn't provide all the ressources for you might actually be useful.

To give people the choice of having something between being fully specced into one thing and being a bit more balanced, you need to have those choices. And yes, this might be annoying for people who happen to play a class right now that will not be optimal for doing exactly what they want to do in the end. But my 2 cents: if you care that much about optimizing things, then I think chances are you have more than one character, anyway, and worst case you'll just have to level one more to do exactly what you want. I don't think that's gonna be the end of the world.

CameraBeardThePirate wrote: »

I'd argue that the older classes are at an advantage in many cases to be honest. Templar and DK can both sub in 2 damage lines and still keep their burst heals and Major Resolve buffs. Necro and Arcanist don't have that luxury (unless youre going purely selfish as an Arcanist).

Take DK for example - you can sub in 2 damage skill lines, keeping just Draconic Power, and you'll still have access to fantastic passives, a great damage ultimate, and an amazing burst heal.

Compare that to Necro - if you sub out Bone Tyrant, you need to sub in a skill tree that has Resolve. If you sub out Living Death, you need to sub in another tree with a burst heal.

So instead the necromancer subs out bone tyrant for Storm Calling, Draconic Power, Restoring Light, or Winter's Embrace. Instantly has a better resolve source from any of them, and either a strong burst heal from three of the ones I named, or they grab SC since it would be able to cover resolve, major or minor expedition, crit surge for sustained healing + sorc/brut, streak for a real hard CC, and MW for an execute.

You don't even particularly NEED to swap in a tree with resolve, since you could always choose to cover it with chudan or even balance. Why would a non-tank necromancer ever want to keep bone tyrant when they could grab a good utility or damage line in its place?

Maybe just give some buff to pure classes in a simple way. Like using 2 skill line from same classes give you additional 10% damage / defense / recovery, 3 for 20% or so. Detail number can be adjusted, but it is the idea.

For instance, replace Meteor with Colossus and add Blastbones to the Plar combo Javellin + Meteor -> Radiant

Edit: On second thought this doesnt make sense, Gravelord doesnt match up 1:1 with Dawns Wrath or Aedric Spear like Draconic Power does with Winters Embrace