Dev definitive statement on role/ roles for GWF

scatheuk

Can we please have a definitive response from Devs BEFORE 25th April on where they are hoping to take this class, and what the perceived role/ roles they want to target for GWF.

Don't care if it's a tank, tank/dps, aoe dps, aoe tank, dps statement, just so as there is no doubt for anyone that is thinking about creating GWF as first character.

I'm sure people will post links, and there is pretty much a link to support a number of different views, all with different time stamps. Having said that, there's clear evidence that many people currently do NOT understand the role, evidenced by all the forum back-and-forth.

Really need to know what the envisaged role is (no preference, just preference for clarity) for launch of OB (incl. early access) and Devs intention for where to take the class.

I want to make an informed decision on what class to play at launch, without wasting time on a character which ends up being adjusted to a role I never wanted to play at all.

devoneaux

A versatile (Can AoE or Single Target relatively well) tanky dps is about as definitive as you're going to get, GWF doesn't have a clearly defined roll, it wasn't made to have one. It is the bard of warrior types as it stands.

scatheuk

Yeah, always up for a debate and very happy to enteratain opinions. I actually don't care what it is, but just want official confirmation what their plans are for that's all ;p

micdarau

Low dps AOE some of a tanky Tank:) OP plz nerf GWF

terhix

I believe I've read a PW/red (whatever you call them here?) post saying that GWF will be outdpsed by rogues becuase it's a dps/tank hybrid - as in: capable of both at the same time but not really master at either, rather then being able to master either with proper spec. That seems pretty clear to me, you can steer it a bit more towards one extreme or the other, but you will not deal as much dps as a rogue or be tough as a GF, and that's perfectly fine.

rojor

terhix wrote: »

I believe I've read a PW/red (whatever you call them here?) post saying that GWF will be outdpsed by rogues becuase it's a dps/tank hybrid - as in: capable of both at the same time but not really master at either, rather then being able to master either with proper spec. That seems pretty clear to me, you can steer it a bit more towards one extreme or the other, but you will not deal as much dps as a rogue or be tough as a GF, and that's perfectly fine.

could you please link said post because i can't find it for the life of me and in the same vein of OP's post would love some clarification on the subject as open beta is 6days3hours and 29mins away:(

terhix

Browser but can't find it now myself .

zingarbage

terhix wrote: »

I believe I've read a PW/red (whatever you call them here?) post saying that GWF will be outdpsed by rogues becuase it's a dps/tank hybrid - as in: capable of both at the same time but not really master at either, rather then being able to master either with proper spec. That seems pretty clear to me, you can steer it a bit more towards one extreme or the other, but you will not deal as much dps as a rogue or be tough as a GF, and that's perfectly fine.

The closest I could find for this statement was from a moderator which is simply a player that moderates the forums. The actual people who work for PW have been fairly clear that at least one of the roles of the GWF is aoe striker. They said it in the stream and I simply sent them a message as well asking.

scatheuk

I think my point is that regardless of what was said and when, clearly nothing has been said recently by a Dev (not a forum moderator) which gives any real clarity considering all the changes over recent weeks/ months.

I think there's enough confusion in all GWF related posts on these forums to warrant a specific statement/ reply by a Dev as to their intentions/ current aim.

raugar

and why should a dev tell YOU? you are not that important to them :P. and why do you Need someone else to define the role you can Play anyway? start thinking, look at the class and decide for yourself what you can do with him.

zingarbage

scatheuk wrote: »

I think my point is that regardless of what was said and when, clearly nothing has been said recently by a Dev (not a forum moderator) which gives any real clarity considering all the changes over recent weeks/ months.

I think there's enough confusion in all GWF related posts on these forums to warrant a specific statement/ reply by a Dev as to their intentions/ current aim.

Just send them a PM and make sure to ask if you can post what they say on the forums since you are not supposed to post private messages. I didn't ask that so can't really post the response.

elspethtirelnw

I don't really expect a developer response before release. It still would be nice if they did something about Sentinel threat generation, but I doubt it's a priority at this point. I hope they have at least noticed that many people are unhappy with the current state of the class, either as a result of balance or combat design/mechanics.

However, I wouldn't complain if they happened to make any kind of a sincere statement about the GWF at this point.

scatheuk

raugar wrote: »

and why should a dev tell YOU? you are not that important to them :P. and why do you Need someone else to define the role you can Play anyway? start thinking, look at the class and decide for yourself what you can do with him.

I'm not asking one to tell me specifically, hence the post on a open forum. I would think it would be the topic that would be important to them. I can look at the class and decide what I want to do with it, but it's also about where they are trying to get to with recent changes, but nice trolling.

scatheuk

zingarbage wrote: »

Just send them a PM and make sure to ask if you can post what they say on the forums since you are not supposed to post private messages. I didn't ask that so can't really post the response.

PM sent ;p

silknight

I posted a similar thread asking for a response from devs, they've yet to give an official announcement, I hope this at least gets some official recognition.

terhix

Given that one comment I mentioned wasn't from PW - I wouldn't be surprised if you don't get any response. I've played enough MMOs, or competitive games in general, to know that developers will think twice before dropping a blanket statement like that. Regardless of what they would say the role of the class is or would be, this would only end up being used as leverage by players to demand changes:

- if they say that GWF is a dps/tank hybrid, then you will have people complaining that the class doesn't excell at either.
- if they say that GWF can spec into both a full featured striker or full featured tank, then people will complain if their vision of it doesn't match the description - whether they end up not doing as much dps as a rogue or tank and hold threat as well as a GF.
- if they, goodness forbid, say that GWF has no particular focus and it's "just" a tough melee guy with a greatsword, well, I don't think I need to explain that one.

In either way somebody will always be unhappy. While raugar's post sounds rude, he does have a point. You had access to beta tests, can read about the class on the wiki, can read opinions and feedback of people that played the class, you can watch videos - that makes for a much better estimate of what the class is than a developer telling you that the class is X in two words.

scatheuk

terhix wrote: »

In either way somebody will always be unhappy. While raugar's post sounds rude, he does have a point. You had access to beta tests, can read about the class on the wiki, can read opinions and feedback of people that played the class, you can watch videos - that makes for a much better estimate of what the class is than a developer telling you that the class is X in two words.

I have two experience points I can trust, my own experiences in BW3 and BW4, both relatively different experiences, and with only two solid points of reference (with reasonable amount of variance) it's very hard to fit any sort of line against that. Regardless, point is for my own information purposes, but also for others considering GWF. I think no-one can argue that out of the 5 classes currently available, there is the most confusion/ uncertainty on what the Devs intention for it are.

terhix

scatheuk wrote: »

I have two experience points I can trust, my own experiences in BW3 and BW4, both relatively different experiences, and with only two solid points of reference (with reasonable amount of variance) it's very hard to fit any sort of line against that. Regardless, point is for my own information purposes, but also for others considering GWF. I think no-one can argue that out of the 5 classes currently available, there is the most confusion/ uncertainty on what the Devs intention for it are.

I do see the confusion of other people, I'm not confused at all myself. The other 4 classes are one-dimensional in their roles, this one isn't, and I like it this way. In fact, my first experience of coming to these forums was seeing people complaining that the class is weak / nerfed / underpowered / etc., and then I knew that this is the right class for me to play, I keep having dejavu when people complain that particular class is weak but when I play it, it appears to me to be pretty amazing .

silknight

The problem with beta impressions and future impressions are that the developmental vision of the class may not match up, or for that matter change altogether somewhere along the developmental process. I've seen classes get reworked right before a game launches from beta to release in other games many times. I for one don't want to get heavily invested in a class that becomes something else entirely. These kinds of bait and switch are the worst.

terhix

silknight wrote: »

The problem with beta impressions and future impressions are that the developmental vision of the class may not match up, or for that matter change altogether somewhere along the developmental process. I've seen classes get reworked right before a game launches from beta to release in other games many times. I for one don't want to get heavily invested in a class that becomes something else entirely. These kinds of bait and switch are the worst.

@bolded: which is precisely why I think it's unlikely we will get a clear statement on some hard defined role of GWF, if they declared themselves one way or the other it would limit greatly the wiggle room for fine tuning the class (without developers sounding as if they are lying, which is worse than being quiet).

zingarbage

silknight wrote: »

The problem with beta impressions and future impressions are that the developmental vision of the class may not match up, or for that matter change altogether somewhere along the developmental process. I've seen classes get reworked right before a game launches from beta to release in other games many times. I for one don't want to get heavily invested in a class that becomes something else entirely. These kinds of bait and switch are the worst.

Reading that interview released today I'm not sure if the GWF will get any changes from now until launch. They basically said they are only working on server stability until launch. Hopefully they make time to work on GWF because they did also state they want 5 really done classes at launch.

silknight

Exactly, I want 5 fleshed out unique classes, we have 4, and the 5th is currently the little red headed step child of the bunch.

banicks

My experience with most "warrior" classes such as the GWF, is that they are jack of all trades, master of none.

I believe that is Trion's intention in this instance. GWF will not see single target DPS of a rogue, but they will see improved DPS on their AoE damage - where a rogue will falter slightly depending on experience.

You won't get a definitive intention and direction of the class, play it how you want it.

zingarbage

banicks wrote: »

My experience with most "warrior" classes such as the GWF, is that they are jack of all trades, master of none.

I believe that is Trion's intention in this instance. GWF will not see single target DPS of a rogue, but they will see improved DPS on their AoE damage - where a rogue will falter slightly depending on experience.

You won't get a definitive intention and direction of the class, play it how you want it.

Trion? hehe.

vernednd

zingarbage wrote: »

Reading that interview released today I'm not sure if the GWF will get any changes from now until launch. They basically said they are only working on server stability until launch. Hopefully they make time to work on GWF because they did also state they want 5 really done classes at launch.

You are assuming that we played the most recent version of the game in BWE4. Typically, beta weekends and events are the most recent stable client, especially since they are more of a marketing and stress testing tool lately. To presume that known bugs were not already fixed, and that class balance is not being or been addressed goes against past experience. It is common for developers to over and under tune classes/powers/feats etc... to find the middle ground.

To the OP, I would rather the developers work on the game, than take time to answer every question or concern that anyone posts on their forums. That would be counter productive to getting the game ready for open beta. I always find all the doom and gloom posts prior to a game's launch rather entertaining, only this time my popcorn machine is on the 'fritz'...

Cheers!

rojor

vernednd wrote: »

You are assuming that we played the most recent version of the game in BWE4. Typically, beta weekends and events are the most recent stable client, especially since they are more of a marketing and stress testing tool lately. To presume that known bugs were not already fixed, and that class balance is not being or been addressed goes against past experience. It is common for developers to over and under tune classes/powers/feats etc... to find the middle ground.

To the OP, I would rather the developers work on the game, than take time to answer every question or concern that anyone posts on their forums. That would be counter productive to getting the game ready for open beta. I always find all the doom and gloom posts prior to a game's launch rather entertaining, only this time my popcorn machine is on the 'fritz'...

Cheers!

Whilst I accept that nothing in the last BWE is concrete your reply merely fosters the view that "they haven't said anything because they haven't so put up and shut up", when in reality there is no clear definition of the class that I can find on any PWE/Cryptic media or other class definitions on their homepage or their extended FAQ short of some youtube videos. However when i look at the news page they have just announced a partnership with Curse for an Official Neverwinter Wiki. Now this is somewhat important because if it is sanctioned as an official information resource then we have an answer on the question me and OP wanted answered.

The Great Weapon Fighters class definition - "The great weapon fighter is a warrior who eschews shields in favor of large two-handed weapons. They rely on a strong aggressive offense, and yet are still durable enough to serve as a guardian in a pinch. "

So I finally have my answer and am glad to have a definition for the class I wish to play, this is by no means the final word from the devs and seeing as its still going to be an open beta soft launch it can/may/will/should change in the future.

p.s. I'm going to go make some popcorn.

raal1

rojor wrote: »

Whilst I accept that nothing in the last BWE is concrete your reply merely fosters the view that "they haven't said anything because they haven't so put up and shut up", when in reality there is no clear definition of the class that I can find on any PWE/Cryptic media or other class definitions on their homepage or their extended FAQ short of some youtube videos. However when i look at the news page they have just announced a partnership with Curse for an Official Neverwinter Wiki. Now this is somewhat important because if it is sanctioned as an official information resource then we have an answer on the question me and OP wanted answered.

The Great Weapon Fighters class definition - "The great weapon fighter is a warrior who eschews shields in favor of large two-handed weapons. They rely on a strong aggressive offense, and yet are still durable enough to serve as a guardian in a pinch. "

So I finally have my answer and am glad to have a definition for the class I wish to play, this is by no means the final word from the devs and seeing as its still going to be an open beta soft launch it can/may/will/should change in the future.

p.s. I'm going to go make some popcorn.

Great find! One would have to assume that this is at least their vision for the class. Thanks for the post.

silknight

rojor wrote: »

The Great Weapon Fighters class definition - "The great weapon fighter is a warrior who eschews shields in favor of large two-handed weapons. They rely on a strong aggressive offense, and yet are still durable enough to serve as a guardian in a pinch. "

So I finally have my answer and am glad to have a definition for the class I wish to play, this is by no means the final word from the devs and seeing as its still going to be an open beta soft launch it can/may/will/should change in the future.

p.s. I'm going to go make some popcorn.

Good for curse. They got the rights to post the official wiki, doesn't mean their info is up to date yet, if you read the post, says that they'll be supplying info over the coming weeks. And as wiki's go, they're not always the best source of info. Anyone with access can alter info.
Pass some popcorn this way.

mewbrey

silknight wrote: »

Good for curse. They got the rights to post the official wiki, doesn't mean their info is up to date yet, if you read the post, says that they'll be supplying info over the coming weeks. And as wiki's go, they're not always the best source of info. Anyone with access can alter info.
Pass some popcorn this way.

For example: http://neverwinter.gamepedia.com/Guardian_Fighter

It has guardian fighters primary stat as STR, its not it is CON.

terhix

silknight wrote: »

Good for curse. They got the rights to post the official wiki, doesn't mean their info is up to date yet, if you read the post, says that they'll be supplying info over the coming weeks. And as wiki's go, they're not always the best source of info. Anyone with access can alter info.
Pass some popcorn this way.

Let me ask, out of sheer curiosity, would such definition - if it was official - bother you personally?

graysant

The GWF will Improvise, Adapt and Overcome.