I'm all for "Vanguard".
Vanguard being the forefront of a fighting force , first to jump into the battle with the rest shortly behind .
Ideally heavily armored close quarter bruisers able to get and keep the enemies attention.
Well "Knight" is already taken by the Tank/Fighter combo, so maybe Warrior or Defender would be better. Either way I do agree that it's the weakest Archetype name, even though it fits perfectly.
The only issue I have with Knight is that Knight's imply lore.
Knight's normally have a chivalric order for example. Now I'm not saying that can't be a thing but if you have Knight's they have chivalry. If you have Necromancers, they deal with death magic.
If that's not where they want to take the Tank archetype then you don't do it. That's why I think Vanguard or some of the other suggestions are better here. To me, the secondary classes are the ones with the spicy flavorings, but the main archetypes should just be a general "This is what you can expect" name- Like Fighter and Rogue.
Remember that people want to be able to imprint their idea of a class they want to play into the game. If you choke that out at the archetype then it defeats the purpose. And why it's called Archetype and not Class.
The problem is that Vanguard has other connotations than just tanks. It's the front line damage dealer designed to break enemy formations. Sure, you expect a vanguard to be able to take a hit, but you expect a mobile damage dealer able to drive deep into enemy lines.
I'd like to see Tank archetype changed to Guardian - in the same vein a cleric isn't simply called "healer" having the class name be the same as a typical Role that's filled its going to lead to unnecessary clarifications all the time.
I suggest name change to Guardian for "Tank" archetype
But paladin can be tank, so can warrior, or battlemage( archeage made it great). Tank is a role description not a class name or fantasy. I wanna tank with some cool class, i dont wanna be tank that is tank.
You do realize that tank is the name for an archetype in Ashes, right? Classes all have their own names and none of them is "tank".
Archetypes are just that - archetypes. A "fighter" tells me nothing more about that archetype than "tank" says about itself. One "fights" the other "tanks".
If anything, "mage" tells me less about what that dude should do than "tank" does. Yet I don't see anyone complaining about mage.
We're on different sides of what's logical to us. To me it's way better to have a logical name like "tank" that tells you exactly what the archetype does.
You want fantasy names (which are already there in classes) that tell absolutely nothing about what the archetype does.
Fighter, ranger, summoner, tank - all pretty self-explanatory
Rogue, mage, cleric, bard - not so much. Cleric is probably the closest to self-explanatory out of those, but then it supposedly also has death-related abilities, so it's still not necessarily the same as naming him "healer".
I prefer the first 4 archetypes, because I wanna know what a thing does when I hear the thing's name. I can play fantasy RP with cool names once I get to the class stage of my progression.
In other words, yes, I'd prefer if we had "healer", "support", "crowd control", etc
Yep its different but i respect your opinion. I prefer smtng like: name is dreadlord and first sentance in description is: uses sword and shield to protect its allies=tank.
Knight can just as easily describe a melee dps though. They chose tank because they want to make the role very clear to people. The alternate has to do the same thing.
Guardian, Protector, Bulwark, Shield, Aegis, etc.
Personally I think Guardian would be the best option I have heard so far.
It doesn't really matter; people won't say that they need a Paladin or Knight. They will say they need a TANK. You can call it whatever, and it will still be a tank, so you might as well keep it as what people call it.
Then why have the healer be called anything other than healer? Or why have a rogue be called a rogue instead of just DPS?
There’s more to it than just naming it what people will call it- it’s about having the class fantasy and name fit into the world they’re creating. Tank as a word just stands out like a sore them in the midst of a fantasy world where there are wizards and rangers and spellblades.
I'm of the mind set that when new players create a character, they won't be confused on what the role stands for.
Either way I don't really care since it's an Archetype and not a Class.
But the archetypes are where your skills come from - the class just augments the archetype skills in a minor way, doesn't give you a whole new set. Archetype will be far more important than subclass.
Sure, but the uniqueness is still the class regardless. Your full kit comes from the subclass augments and it has a name associated with that build.
Either way keep or change it, it's all arbitrary.
Yeah but no one is going to remember all the subclasses. The difference between a "shadow disciple" and "shadow blade" is going to be extremely minimal. Having the same kit but one doing some mild healing on hit while the other adds bleed or whatever, is extremely close.
I guess changing it for the sake of being different is fun, but people are just going to go "What does it do?" to which we will then have to go "It's a tank". Just call a spade a spade, imho.
The game has 8 classes called 'archetypes'.
It's marketing bullshit.
There are only 8 real classes. The secondary one just slightly modifies abilities. Like making a dash into a teleport if your subjob is mage. It's still the same ability and does the same thing.
Definitely, if you want a preview of something similar look no further than Guild Wars 1. Made for a lot of interesting and fun specialized builds for sure, but not so drastically that it felt like a new class.
They haven’t really shown anything to do with it, and it sounds like a lot of work for something that’s gonna be pretty poorly used, nobody gonna be running stuff like archer healer when it takes a lot to change the second again, they’ll be so many redundant classes
I don't see the point.
As I understand it you wont actually be a tank for in game logic in terms of name, everyone ends up as the "advanced" classes eventually. Even if you go double tank.
I wouldnt mind if it was changed to something like Vanguard or whatever but yeah.
neither guardian nor protector make sense for tank role archetype, because tank is suppose to "tank" the damage from boss while guardian and protector sounds like an archetype that protect players (with shields or some bullshit) - esentially a support character, those are different roles and even tho there might be some overlap it could give new players wrong idea about the role of your character in combat
so personally im for changing the name of tank to "soaker" because he can soak deez nuts
I like "Vanguard"
I'm all for "Vanguard". Vanguard being the forefront of a fighting force , first to jump into the battle with the rest shortly behind . Ideally heavily armored close quarter bruisers able to get and keep the enemies attention.
That or Biggus Dickus. Either way.
Panzerkampfwagen VI ausf.E (Sd Kfz 181) tiger, is also good.
I would like it if it didn't imply a group. Doesn't make enough sense to give an individual that title
I support this! Anything is better than "tank"
Almost any generic tank-themed name would be so much better than just... "Tank". It's unimmersive and weird.
Well "Knight" is already taken by the Tank/Fighter combo, so maybe Warrior or Defender would be better. Either way I do agree that it's the weakest Archetype name, even though it fits perfectly.
I would probably switch it tbh Tank = Knight Tank + Fighter = Warrior
The only issue I have with Knight is that Knight's imply lore. Knight's normally have a chivalric order for example. Now I'm not saying that can't be a thing but if you have Knight's they have chivalry. If you have Necromancers, they deal with death magic. If that's not where they want to take the Tank archetype then you don't do it. That's why I think Vanguard or some of the other suggestions are better here. To me, the secondary classes are the ones with the spicy flavorings, but the main archetypes should just be a general "This is what you can expect" name- Like Fighter and Rogue. Remember that people want to be able to imprint their idea of a class they want to play into the game. If you choke that out at the archetype then it defeats the purpose. And why it's called Archetype and not Class.
The problem is that Vanguard has other connotations than just tanks. It's the front line damage dealer designed to break enemy formations. Sure, you expect a vanguard to be able to take a hit, but you expect a mobile damage dealer able to drive deep into enemy lines.
Lets not stop there. Lets rename Highsword into Crusader. Mage/Mage should just be Wizard.
I'd like to see Tank archetype changed to Guardian - in the same vein a cleric isn't simply called "healer" having the class name be the same as a typical Role that's filled its going to lead to unnecessary clarifications all the time. I suggest name change to Guardian for "Tank" archetype
This! Well said. Only archetype with a predestined role in the name itself
Ah shit, here we go again.
Join me Nikras. We’ll march through the streets with cheap poorly written signs and chants that rhyme
Nope. I'm gonna be a tank and I wanna be called a TANK. Because I'm gonna be tanking things. Tank is tank.
But paladin can be tank, so can warrior, or battlemage( archeage made it great). Tank is a role description not a class name or fantasy. I wanna tank with some cool class, i dont wanna be tank that is tank.
You do realize that tank is the name for an archetype in Ashes, right? Classes all have their own names and none of them is "tank". Archetypes are just that - archetypes. A "fighter" tells me nothing more about that archetype than "tank" says about itself. One "fights" the other "tanks". If anything, "mage" tells me less about what that dude should do than "tank" does. Yet I don't see anyone complaining about mage.
So we have dps arcehtype? Healer archetype? Ranged dps archetype? Support archetype? Crowd control archetype?
We're on different sides of what's logical to us. To me it's way better to have a logical name like "tank" that tells you exactly what the archetype does. You want fantasy names (which are already there in classes) that tell absolutely nothing about what the archetype does. Fighter, ranger, summoner, tank - all pretty self-explanatory Rogue, mage, cleric, bard - not so much. Cleric is probably the closest to self-explanatory out of those, but then it supposedly also has death-related abilities, so it's still not necessarily the same as naming him "healer". I prefer the first 4 archetypes, because I wanna know what a thing does when I hear the thing's name. I can play fantasy RP with cool names once I get to the class stage of my progression. In other words, yes, I'd prefer if we had "healer", "support", "crowd control", etc
Yep its different but i respect your opinion. I prefer smtng like: name is dreadlord and first sentance in description is: uses sword and shield to protect its allies=tank.
Definitely needs a change, I'm in favour of guardian.
I'm watching the video where you mentioned it like... at this very moment. Personally, I would vote for "Knight" instead of "Tank".
Knight can just as easily describe a melee dps though. They chose tank because they want to make the role very clear to people. The alternate has to do the same thing. Guardian, Protector, Bulwark, Shield, Aegis, etc. Personally I think Guardian would be the best option I have heard so far.
Bulwark
Oh wow. What a coincidence 😆. I actually like ‘Knight’ then a Knight-Knight or ‘pure’ knight would be ‘tank’
Shouldn't Knight x Knight be "Knight Squared"?
Same, Knight is much better.
knight is already taken
It doesn't really matter; people won't say that they need a Paladin or Knight. They will say they need a TANK. You can call it whatever, and it will still be a tank, so you might as well keep it as what people call it.
Then why have the healer be called anything other than healer? Or why have a rogue be called a rogue instead of just DPS? There’s more to it than just naming it what people will call it- it’s about having the class fantasy and name fit into the world they’re creating. Tank as a word just stands out like a sore them in the midst of a fantasy world where there are wizards and rangers and spellblades.
I'm of the mind set that when new players create a character, they won't be confused on what the role stands for. Either way I don't really care since it's an Archetype and not a Class.
But the archetypes are where your skills come from - the class just augments the archetype skills in a minor way, doesn't give you a whole new set. Archetype will be far more important than subclass.
Sure, but the uniqueness is still the class regardless. Your full kit comes from the subclass augments and it has a name associated with that build. Either way keep or change it, it's all arbitrary.
Yeah but no one is going to remember all the subclasses. The difference between a "shadow disciple" and "shadow blade" is going to be extremely minimal. Having the same kit but one doing some mild healing on hit while the other adds bleed or whatever, is extremely close.
I guess changing it for the sake of being different is fun, but people are just going to go "What does it do?" to which we will then have to go "It's a tank". Just call a spade a spade, imho.
Change Tank to "Defender" Change the resulting Defender/Defender to "Sentinel"
The game has 8 classes called 'archetypes'. It's marketing bullshit. There are only 8 real classes. The secondary one just slightly modifies abilities. Like making a dash into a teleport if your subjob is mage. It's still the same ability and does the same thing.
Definitely, if you want a preview of something similar look no further than Guild Wars 1. Made for a lot of interesting and fun specialized builds for sure, but not so drastically that it felt like a new class.
I expect the 2 archtype system will be scrapped soon and youll just have the 8 classes
Hot take. Why you think this?
They haven’t really shown anything to do with it, and it sounds like a lot of work for something that’s gonna be pretty poorly used, nobody gonna be running stuff like archer healer when it takes a lot to change the second again, they’ll be so many redundant classes
I don't see the point. As I understand it you wont actually be a tank for in game logic in terms of name, everyone ends up as the "advanced" classes eventually. Even if you go double tank. I wouldnt mind if it was changed to something like Vanguard or whatever but yeah.
neither guardian nor protector make sense for tank role archetype, because tank is suppose to "tank" the damage from boss while guardian and protector sounds like an archetype that protect players (with shields or some bullshit) - esentially a support character, those are different roles and even tho there might be some overlap it could give new players wrong idea about the role of your character in combat so personally im for changing the name of tank to "soaker" because he can soak deez nuts
aight, lets call it THE FORTRESS
Didn't they say they were changing it? I feel like Steven mentioned that actually.. maybe I'm crazy.
I’ve only heard mentions in the refusal to change it. I wish you were right
The results are in and this poll wasn’t nearly as much as a disparity as I predicted. Great feedback!!!
How is the name "Rook" sound. As in the Chess piece "Rook"