Luneca wrote: »

Nordstern wrote: »

Luneca wrote: »

Seraphayel wrote: »

Luneca wrote: »

My brother plays templar and joked that for him to give up subclassing in a PvP context, Templar would have to have a 5 effect auto cleanse over a timed interval as a mastery. I told him "that ain't happening" and we both laughed about it because we know that without something that powerful, it's a skip because we can use subclassing to build in a way that allows that to happen without the masteries or limitation of Templar's subpar skill toolkit.

Templar is getting some of the best class masteries (for PvP), so I don't get this either. Class masteries might not be perfect yet, but they are a great step towards striking a balance between pure classes and subclassing.

Adding more weapon and spell damage, adding more healing, adding more block mitigation -- who cares?

At some point none of this matters in an actual PvP encounter.

What? All these matter greatly in an actual pvp encounter. The only playstyles that will still be definitely outperforming are pvp tanks and probably some gank setups. Ofc running a pure class needs more work of thought and isnt as easy as the two really easy playstyles i mentioned but if you know what you do, most pure classes will at least be on subclass level.

I don't understand why people believe things like this poster posted above. Here's a simple experiment ANYONE can try. Go on live with your pure class other than DK, go PvP. What's wrong? List it down.

Now, what was wrong? Did class masteries address any of it?

And the answer is no for most of them. It's really that simple. Yet people are actually believing that these masteries change things and compete with subclassing?

Look, you go and enjoy the "pure" class, esp. "pure" templar. But when you find out that none of those masteries matter in reality, you'll be subclassed back in a day or AP for anyone that knows better.

Fortunately, all I do and will continue to do is fire siege. Life's good either way.

I've been playing solo/small scale pvp in this game since release, why do you think you know things so much better than me? I create all my builds myself and dont copy some yt stuff. I can assess the strength of these class masteries very well. It's really not that hard to understand that warden and sorc will be very strong if you know what to do next patch. Other classes will be insanely tanky on the other side. But yes, you have to ADAPT to the class and cant expect to use one way of playing on every class and be equally successfull. And tbh your comments sound like thats the exact problem that you encounter. The only class that will still be far off from subclassing is arcanist.

Subclassing is fantastic. Best new feature since launch.

Having options other than roleplay doesn't actually prevent your roleplay.

You can still monoclass. Nobody is stopping you. You're even getting free buffs for it.

Nordstern wrote: »

Luneca wrote: »

Nordstern wrote: »

Luneca wrote: »

Seraphayel wrote: »

Luneca wrote: »

My brother plays templar and joked that for him to give up subclassing in a PvP context, Templar would have to have a 5 effect auto cleanse over a timed interval as a mastery. I told him "that ain't happening" and we both laughed about it because we know that without something that powerful, it's a skip because we can use subclassing to build in a way that allows that to happen without the masteries or limitation of Templar's subpar skill toolkit.

Templar is getting some of the best class masteries (for PvP), so I don't get this either. Class masteries might not be perfect yet, but they are a great step towards striking a balance between pure classes and subclassing.

Adding more weapon and spell damage, adding more healing, adding more block mitigation -- who cares?

At some point none of this matters in an actual PvP encounter.

What? All these matter greatly in an actual pvp encounter. The only playstyles that will still be definitely outperforming are pvp tanks and probably some gank setups. Ofc running a pure class needs more work of thought and isnt as easy as the two really easy playstyles i mentioned but if you know what you do, most pure classes will at least be on subclass level.

I don't understand why people believe things like this poster posted above. Here's a simple experiment ANYONE can try. Go on live with your pure class other than DK, go PvP. What's wrong? List it down.

Now, what was wrong? Did class masteries address any of it?

And the answer is no for most of them. It's really that simple. Yet people are actually believing that these masteries change things and compete with subclassing?

Look, you go and enjoy the "pure" class, esp. "pure" templar. But when you find out that none of those masteries matter in reality, you'll be subclassed back in a day or AP for anyone that knows better.

Fortunately, all I do and will continue to do is fire siege. Life's good either way.

I've been playing solo/small scale pvp in this game since release, why do you think you know things so much better than me? I create all my builds myself and dont copy some yt stuff. I can assess the strength of these class masteries very well. It's really not that hard to understand that warden and sorc will be very strong if you know what to do next patch. Other classes will be insanely tanky on the other side. But yes, you have to ADAPT to the class and cant expect to use one way of playing on every class and be equally successfull. And tbh your comments sound like thats the exact problem that you encounter. The only class that will still be far off from subclassing is arcanist.

First, take note that you replied to me first. What you said was challenged and my position was expanded on, and remember that it can challenged be because this is what we call a forum. People will have different opinions, there's no need to take offense at that or someone challenging your position. It makes no sense.

I don't assume I know more than anyone, I think everyone on the forum is equivalent. I literally cannot understand the viewpoint being presented. Take a look at your own statement defending it, and tell me it doesn't have a contradiction within it.

Adding more tankiness to templar doesn't alleviate anything with the class and its issues. Running to sorcs and warden masteries to justify how bad and insufficient templar and the rest of them are isn't a winning strategy or sound argument. Not everyone builds their templar to hold block all day either. And even in a PvE context it's a poor option vs subclassing if what you wanted to do was take more damage in.

If you're not a templar based around block, then what good is one of those masteries presented? Then we have the other masteries: some damage, some healing, etc. -- all negligible quanties in a realistic scenario. The masteries on templar, unlike subclassing only increase power whether tankiness or damage output IF a certain scenario happens in combat. This is not the same or ever will be equivalent to subclassing that can increase damage overall without condition by allowing you to build into areas that couldn't otherwise be done without subclassing.

In reality what will happen is that you will already win or lose the fight before it even starts. In 5 seconds on live and in the next patch, the fight is over in PvP ; we know the winner already or if it's going to be a stalemate. What exactly do any of those templar masteries do to change overall combat performance in a way that it makes a difference in a real encounter and not a target dummy? Can you explain that, because I need to know.

Because what I see is that the mastery system is yet another failed system that didn't achieve anything besides buffing niche builds except on the "chosen one" classes -- whichever they may be once the patch drops. That's not an answer to subclassing, it's not even an adequate stop-gap. It's a waste of time that could have been spent advancing the reworks of other classes OR fixing buggy skills OR doing a targeted rework of certain skills that needed them years ago.

The bold makes zero sense because making the class more tanky essentially means that the opportunity to do something else with better masteries is removed or stunted, so it actually pushes you to play in a tanky play style to get the most out of the mastery. How does that make "more than one way of playing?" It sounds like it does the opposite, unless you, you know just go to subclassing instead.

Also, "adapt" "extremely tanky" -- yet not as tanky as DK or subclassing its skill lines, not as adaptable as other classes either; which is why you don't see templars outside of group contexts and why you still won't see them often overall in Cyrodiil. Sure a pure templar running in a ball or trial groups got buffed, but who cares about that context when the individual stops mattering anyway? And for a ball group healer, I would never run pure templar and someone that does honestly does not know any better esp. if they are only doing the healing role in a ball group.

Right now, on live, templar does nothing warden and DK couldn't do better. Templar, necro, and arcansist still won't be popular in PvP because they are still subpar even with the masteries. If they are present they are going to be subclassed because the masteries did nothing to alleviate their issues. The masteries do nothing subclassing couldn't do better with the added flexibility of other, better skills than the lackluster ones in those replaced skill lines on those three classes.

No fix on buggy skills, no greater access and uptime to major BASIC buffs, damage still a joke, etc. We can go on, but I conced you are more experienced and knowledgeable than me, so I won't go into extreme detail about it.

Lastly, I have adpted to Cyrodiil a long time ago. That's why I just fire siege.