I would prefer to get rid of rigid "classes".

No.

Because after rework old class can be even worse than before.

Did someone say "capes"?

That's a vague question. Why are you asking? What are the problems with classes as they stand?

"I like capes" seemed like a suitably vague answer. I should have said "no", though. I like the old classes better than the new ones. Warden is a boring class and necro (which I don't own) seems fundamentally a carbon copy. Blastbones = another flavor of Shalks. As a PvPer the class-defining skills are the following in my book:

Streak
Cloak and Shadow Image
DK Leap

Templar players would probably add Extended Ritual, though I simply like templar for it's complete toolkit with AOE, burst, gap closer, reliable CC and execute skills.

Magden is extremely lacking in comparison. It's buff-heavy and lacks situational skills. Random CCs don't count and are not conducive to skilled gameplay. There are fun skills, such as the teleport rune and swing to friendly player ones, but they're such non-essential skills that they don't rise to define the class and make you want to play it like Streak, Cloak, Shadow Image and Leap do.

If there's a mobility-theme to the skills I favor, that is perhaps no accident and might expose my personal bias, but I don't think anyone will really argue with the above list from a PvP perspective.

Based on their track record, I would not like the current combat team to have a go at reworking the older classes. Quite the opposite, in fact.

To further elaborate, the current combat team has destroyed magblade PvP playstyles with their bean-counter approach to class design. The older design team seemed to have a vision as to how magblade plays. For example this was evident in the multiple options the class had to obtain speed, among them Crippling Grasp. Keeping out of the clutches of melee players with that skill was never the easiest thing to do, but nonetheless the combat team saw fit to limit Major Expedition to the most nonsensical skill that had that buff, Path of Darkness. Their skill audit wasn't entirely pointless. I think overall balance is actually quite good and current build variety quite high from my perspective as a CP PvPer. However their skill audit was IMO also hap-hazard and likely performed by rote in cases such as the above.

I am surprised at the number of people who are voting that Zos needs to do more changes to combat when we have had such major changes over the past couple of years.

I vote for a better balance between classes but not a rework for the sake of it.

Danikat wrote: »

For example if templar was 'reworked' to make them purely focused on the heavy armoured tank 'paladin' theme many people see for them...

The funny thing is that a templar DD, especially a stamplar, works by being built and played very aggressively in PvP. It works by putting people on the defensive and this has IMO been recognised by ZOS. It's spammable is clunky. It points in one direction, it's a channel that leaves you open to counter-attack (can't be block-cast) and it's not a given that all 4 hits connect with the target. ZOS gave that skill a lot of power as a result, and rightly so. As things stand it's IMO something that templar needs in order to function. The players who make that class really work are anything but tanks.