Hapexamendios wrote: »

Other:

It doesn't matter as I never use them.

Thanks for the input lol

Yes. Also, the style pages should've been available to all classes all along.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

At this point it's the last Bastian of class choice feeling like it matters. I wouldn't even care if they made it more restrictive and made it available only to pure classes with mega buffs to make up for the nerfs.

OP’s talking about the style pages, not the actual sets.

If "class" isn't going to exist anymore, "class motif" is kind of an oxymoron.

Hi, bringing this back to the front.

I want to go back to this statement from the devs from today's Subclassing article.

“Class identity is still important for key aspects of our game: Achievement, class styles, class scripts, class item sets, and so much more,” Day emphasizes. “If you wish to have two or more skill lines of a class, you must be that class. You can keep your character pure and continue to complete content as you have before, but you are still locked into that character creation decision.”

Do they understand what players had in mind by "Class Identity?" Players were talking about what skills they could use, what buffs they had access to, what passives their lines allowed, how they could support their groups in their own unique ways. All of that is now being opened to all players regardless of Class.

And yet, the devs' idea of 'Class identity' is specifically 'what you are allowed to wear.' That's about it.

Why is a character - even one who uses 5 Templar skills along with a Templar ultimate - disallowed from wearing a star on his chest only because a player made him as a Sorcerer 6 years ago? Is the fashion a character has really a major thing that will make you feel like a given Class? "Ooh, too bad you weren't born a Nightblade, so you can't have 3D modelled pockets on your pants."

Everyone knows that Fashion and Housing are the true endgames here. And yet, we have the developers doubling down on locking fashion away from characters for no good reasons. I can't imagine the housing community being okay with "We made a new house for players, but only Dragonknights can use the door to enter"

Please look at the poll above. And please also remember that for anyone who doesn't like their characters to wear Class styles from Classes other than what they were originally made as, that there are over 600 other outfit styles that they can wear instead; they are not being forced to wear something they don't want, but many of the Class styles have no stylistic equivalent for the players who do want to use them.

I want to point out one more quote from the article, from the same Systems Designer as the above:

“If players wished to experience other classes and their combat capabilities, they were forced to create a new character. With the Subclassing system, we really want customization to give players more control over their player fantasy.”

So... you realize that wanting to experience combat in a different way means you were forced to create a new character. And yet, you're perfectly fine with saying that while the combat experience should be customizable to give players control over their player fantasy, we will still be required to create a new character if we want to... give them a certain hat.

I guess "control over player fantasy" doesn't account for any fantasies we may have at the Outfit station... 😒

Wereswan wrote: »

If "class" isn't going to exist anymore, "class motif" is kind of an oxymoron.

Why are people thinking pure classes won't exist anymore? They won't be erased, subclassing is not mandatory, and I bet a lot of people will still use their pure class and do content the same way they always did. They won't be as competitive for high end-game dps or pvp, but everything else they did so far will be exactly the same.

Back to the OP, though I will be using subclassing, I always thought the IA sets and style pages should remain as is. Since subclasses give an advantage, then there should be reasons for someone to still use their pure class, and imo they should make the sets stronger and also keep the pages exclusive, so there is are incentives/advantages for those choices as well.

Sure, why not, here's a 16oz of coffee fueled first muddled thought:

If 3 classmeld: The base class can wear 3 of its style, the other 2 can wear 2 each of their styles.
If 2 classmeld: The base class can wear 5 of its style, the other 1 can wear 2 of its style.

If farming style pages and class gear at IA, chances exist to get drops for the class warts.

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Jaimeh wrote: »

then there should be reasons for someone to still use their pure class, and imo they should make the sets stronger and also keep the pages exclusive, so there is are incentives/advantages for those choices as well.

Really? You're implying the only reason to use a pure Class is to wear a specific pair of pants?

Look, I want pure classes to be on par with Subclasses. But forcing pure Classes to be pigeonholed into two specific gear sets does not give that freedom back, it just means you have literally only one way to exist as a pure class.

I'm saying with the way things are right now, and though they're expecting the balance issues but not doing anything about them on this cycle, then having the sets as a way for people to still be competitive and on par is a good interim solution. Having nothing is worse than having to use a particular set (which by the way is what the meta chasers have been doing forever so it's nothing shocking or new).