No HUmar class? xD

[Genoa]

I didn't really notice until now, but it seems the classes that will be out soon seem to have practically every hybrid mix EXCEPT one. Let me explain
Fighgunner: Melee w/ some guns (Hunter5/Ranger3)
Acrofighter: Guns w/ some melee (Hunter3/Ranger5)
Guntecher: Guns w/ some magic (Ranger5/Force3)
Acrotecher: Magic w/ some guns. (Ranger3/Force5)
(Protranser we all know is Guns & Melee)

Here's where it goes a little strange...
Wartecher: Magic w/ some melee (Hunter3/Force5)
(HUmar?): Melee w/some magic plz :< (Hunter5/Force3)

Think it will ever happen? Or is Wartecher our only Melee/magic oriented warrior?

[HFlowen]

Wartechers do better damage with melee than with techs despite their type requirements.

[Genoa]

Wartecher
Skills: LV30
Bullets: LV20
Attack TECHNICs: LV30
Support TECHNICs: LV30
* S-ranks: twin daggers, daggers, wands
* A-ranks: swords, knuckles, spears, twin sabers, twin claws, sabers, claws, whips, longbows, handguns, cards, shadoogs, madoogs

(Techfighter)
Skills: LV40
Bullets: LV20
Attack TECHNICs: LV20
Support TECHNICs: LV20
* S-rank: Twin Claws, Knuckles, Twin Daggers, Spear
* A-rank: sabers, handguns, madoogs, wands, sword, twin saber, cards

?? hehe

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: MegamanX on 2007-09-25 18:57 ]</font>

[Kismet]

On 2007-09-25 18:44, MegamanX wrote:
I didn't really notice until now, but it seems the classes that will be out soon seem to have practically every hybrid mix EXCEPT one. Let me explain
Fighgunner: Melee w/ some guns (Hunter5/Ranger3)
Acrofighter: Guns w/ some melee (Hunter3/Ranger5)
Guntecher: Guns w/ some magic (Ranger5/Force3)
Acrotecher: Magic w/ some guns. (Ranger3/Force5)
(Protranser we all know is Guns & Melee)

Here's where it goes a little strange...
Wartecher: Magic w/ some melee (Hunter3/Force5)
(HUmar?): Melee w/some magic plz :< (Hunter5/Force3)

Think it will ever happen? Or is Wartecher our only Melee/magic oriented warrior?



Forwarding what the last person said, Wartecher is more melee-inclined than magic-inclined. IF it was more magic-inclined, then WTs would be able to use both wands AND rods and then to make up for the use of rods, we'd have a certain melee weapon that we'd be unable to use.

But one CAN make magic their forte with WT even with just wands. All depends on the techs you have, how much you work on them, armor, weapons, synthing, race, blahblahblah...

[Genoa]

Do they get like... a HUGE ATP bonus per class level and some TP? Because I'm looking at the potential stats of a m-newman Wartecher... and I know I'm newman, but it seems if I went WT as this character, I'd start off with 267 ATP and 438 TP >_>

EDIT: If there was a class similar to what I stated, it would be easier for newmans.
Class ATP compensate race ATP, Race TP compensates Class TP.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: MegamanX on 2007-09-25 19:07 ]</font>

[HFlowen]

Sou's stat calculator is screwed up right now, but I'll log in and tell you my wartecher 10 stats here in a second...

[HFlowen]

Human Male wartech, 91/10

HP: 2341
ATP: 646
ATA: 244
TP: 766
DFP: 168
EVP: 471
MST: 184
STA: 10

As a newman, you'll have more TP than that, but it doesn't matter much when you're limited to wands and level 20 techs. That might change slightly in AoI, but will still be nowhere near that of a fortetecher.

[Genoa]

=/ so in Wartecher's case, the PA levels are what hold back Tech potential compared to Melee. And in my opinion, having all that TP is somewhat useless when MOST wartechers that I see only use it for support techs, and the buffs/debuffs are not TP dependent.

I would just like good melee abilities with semi-decent support techs behind me. Of course, that could be asking for a little too much. Say... Lv.40 Skills, Lv.20 Support? But if you gimped the statistics perhaps... Meh I don't know :<

[Dragwind]

That's because there are tons of people who can't play WT for shit. You're supposed to use attack techs as WT. The lvl 20 cap doesn't mean you shouldn't use it. /facepalm

Just because "most" WT's don't use attack techs, doesn't make it right. That's like saying most fighgunners don't use bullets, so you shouldn't use them. Doesn't mean they're playing it right.

Remember, most people can't play their class. Don't go by how other people play.

[Dragwind]

inb4wtishumar

[AweOfShe]

On 2007-09-25 19:22, Dragwind wrote:
/facepalm

ACROGUNNERS- WHERE RIFLES SHOOT LIKE MECHS AND MECHS ARE ACTUALLY A NEWMAN SUMMON

[Scion]

LOL HUMAR

[ShadowTFF]

inb4whatishumar

[Genoa]

That's true, but the problem is, I don't exactly want to use attack techs as a fighter <_> But I also don't want to be all fighter, I would like some support techs. I like guntecher a lot because of this concept. It's tech levels are too low to desire attack techs, but the support techs are still decent. I want GUNTECHERS concept thrown in a melee-oriented realm :>

[Dragwind]

Well unfortunately they don't have a class like that. Closest thing I could see to that would be a CAST WT, but not really seeing as they can still tech good.

The biggest mistake everyone makes due to lack of brainpower and will to play a class right is thinking a WT is a humar.


"LOL SABER AND RESTA OMFG YES"

[beatrixkiddo]

WT techs suck shit even at 30. They're good for melee resistant enemies and for laying down some SE but the bulk of your damage will always be melee.

[Genoa]

Well that's why I didn't pick Wartecher, I knew it wasn't "humar" and would be BEST used with techs as well. I actually saw Wartecher more like FOmarl.
I really disliked HUmar on pso, but ya know =/ it would be convenient imo :<
EDIT: more like FOmarl than FOmar xD



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: MegamanX on 2007-09-25 19:38 ]</font>

[Dragwind]

How do you use your techs of course? If you don't use your techs correctly, of course they'll suck. You can pretty much melee anything in any way and it'll be effective enough. Use techs the wrong way and they flat out suck.

For instance, take Gi techs as an example. If you use a gi tech on lets say a mob of 3 enemies, the damage total would be greater if you just used a melee pa.

However, use a Gi tech on a much larger mob of lets say 5 enemies or more using opposite element, you should outdamage in that situation if you were to rather use melee.

You have to take into consideration the type of tech you're using, and on the enemy/mob as well as how many targets the tech hits and for how much damage. As well as overall time it takes to put that damage in.

It all boils down to how well you can use techs. They don't just flat out "suck."



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Dragwind on 2007-09-25 19:41 ]</font>


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Dragwind on 2007-09-25 19:43 ]</font>

[Genoa]

I like the idea of mixing techs with atp-based weaponry, but I'd prefer it to be with ranged weapons. You could even throw in a decent amount of ATP in the class, ranged weapons don't do as much as melee weapons would do.

Oh well, Guntecher and Wartecher's statistics should be swapped in order to please my desires :<

[TetsuyaHikari]

As far as I'm concerned..

this thread is for some HUMAR http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif

[-Ryuki-]

Last I checked, WarTecher WAS the definition of PSU's HUmar. Especially in AoI.

[Genoa]

HUmar using attack techs was a COMPLETE joke on pso, where as Wartechers should be using techs because they have pretty good TP and seeing there's enemies resistant to certain attack type, it's great for melee resistant.

[Dragwind]

On 2007-09-25 19:49, RyukiZero wrote:
Last I checked, WarTecher WAS the definition of PSU's HUmar. Especially in AoI.



Checked? Where did you check this? It was never clamied that Wartecher WAS the definition as you say to be the PSU humar. Not in AoI either. Humar had NO where as close as the teching power that WT has.

That's just a complete fail statement...I can't believe you really said that.

[Shiro_Ryuu]

Hold on, Acrofighter more Ranger than Hunter? So level 40 skills and level 30 bullets makes it more Ranger?

[Dragwind]

That's why you shouldn't really depend on the class requirements on how to play the class. It is after all, just a requirement. Not what the class actually is.

[ljkkjlcm9]

On 2007-09-25 20:04, Shiroryuu wrote:
Hold on, Acrofighter more Ranger than Hunter? So level 40 skills and level 30 bullets makes it more Ranger?


seconded

just because acrofighter needs more ranged doesn't make it guns with some melee... it's still a melee majority class. It's main gun is suppose to be the new Shadoog, and it's the only class with S in it, hence why it needs 5 ranged.

THE JACKEL

[Dragwind]

On 2007-09-25 20:15, ljkkjlcm9 wrote:

On 2007-09-25 20:04, Shiroryuu wrote:
Hold on, Acrofighter more Ranger than Hunter? So level 40 skills and level 30 bullets makes it more Ranger?


seconded

just because acrofighter needs more ranged doesn't make it guns with some melee... it's still a melee majority class. It's main gun is suppose to be the new Shadoog, and it's the only class with S in it, hence why it needs 5 ranged.

THE JACKEL



Prime example.

Also let me add though something that people fail to realize - classes aren't based on just damage output. There's other stats too you know. Another reason for the higher ranger requirement is because of the EVASION they have.

[PJ]

Uh, my HUmar had max MST, and casting wasn't THAT bad.

Seriously, it was good for more then just a very nice Resta, but Rafoie wasn't bad either.

I'd say Wartecher fits the bill for HUmar very well.

[ShadowTFF]

inb4PSUisnotPSO

Seriously. This is two different games, despite the whole idea of ranged, melee and magic classes. If HUmar fits the WT bill, then tell me what PSO class would qualify as a Figunner.

[imfanboy]

WT is closer to HUnewearl, really, than FOmarl - I should know, I PLAYED a FOmarl a lot, and HUnewearl too.

Couldn't get into HUmar; they felt too gimped by only having 50% of the necessary supporting technics, even if the strength was marginally higher than my HUnewearl's or my FOmar's.


But enough of ancient flame wars; strictly speaking Wartecher is better than HUmar in AotI. Technics to match the dedicated Forces in PSO, with a weaponry selection as broad as any Hunter, and awesome gun selection as well comparatively. I can remember how hard I fought to equip the Holy Ray; WTs from the start have bows and cards and...

Today I was using Rabarta against mobs of Vandas, spears against the big nasty Bil De Vears, and bows against Dimmagolous. Nothing in PSO had that kind of versatility.


...PSU is NOT PSO. PSU is in many ways better than PSO. And HUmar was a suck class that looked ugly in any of the outfits; how could anyone be nostalgic for it? http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_disapprove.gif



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: imfanboy on 2007-09-25 20:31 ]</font>

[Syl]

On 2007-09-25 20:15, ljkkjlcm9 wrote:

It's main gun is suppose to be the new Shadoog, and it's the only class with S in it



Guntechers get an S rank of it too, just to clarify.

But yeah, as far as I remember (wasn't much of a HUmar player), HUmar's attack techs we're meh, not really at par with their melee, like WT is/will be.

[Pillan]

On 2007-09-25 20:28, ShadowTFF wrote:
Seriously. This is two different games, despite the whole idea of ranged, melee and magic classes. If HUmar fits the WT bill, then tell me what PSO class would qualify as a Figunner.


HUcaseal

Couldn't resist.

More seriously, I'd advise you ignore the TP stat and just play it like a HUmar (though I'd argue it's closer to HUnewearl). I mean what's really wrong with having all that TP for Resta/Giresta anyway? And, if it bothers you that much, buy a couple techs.

[Scion]

On 2007-09-25 20:26, PJ wrote:
Uh, my HUmar had max MST, and casting wasn't THAT bad.

Seriously, it was good for more then just a very nice Resta, but Rafoie wasn't bad either.

I'd say Wartecher fits the bill for HUmar very well.



Hmmm, OK, I'll take your word for it.

But there's one thing everyone seems to be forgetting:


On 2007-09-25 19:49, RyukiZero wrote:
Last I checked, WarTecher WAS the definition of PSU's HUmar. Especially in AoI.



This IS NOT PSO. Just because it shares the same title doesn't mean it should be compared to it.

This is like making the comparison from Ryu to Cyclops. Yeah, both Street Fighter and Children of the Atom were made by the same people (Capcom), but that doesn't mean Cyclops is the "Ryu" of the X-Men.

Give it a rest people. They aren't bringing back those classes. It's time that we move on and start playing THIS game and not the one that preceded before it.

[PJ]

Nobodies asking for the classes back. Just making comparisons.

And be serious; comparing PSO to PSU is much more logical than comparing Ryu to Cyclops.

Cause we all know Wolverine would be the Ryu of X-Men http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_wacko.gif

[beatrixkiddo]

http://pwv.sakura.ne.jp/image/jacket_m/humertops_ry.jpg
http://pwv.sakura.ne.jp/image/pants_m/humerbottom_ry.jpg
http://pwv.sakura.ne.jp/image/shoes_m/humershoes_ry.jpg

[Scion]

On 2007-09-25 20:44, PJ wrote:
Nobodies asking for the classes back. Just making comparisons.

And be serious; comparing PSO to PSU is much more logical than comparing Ryu to Cyclops.

Cause we all know Wolverine would be the Ryu of X-Men http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_wacko.gif



And that was the point I was trying to make. Even though there are lots of similarities between, not only these two said classes, but the other ones we have as well, it's still not the same, and should not be treated as such.

They really should be treated as if none of us have ever played PSO to make these comparisons, is what I'm really trying to say.

And really, Wolverine? Isn't a bit too crazy fast to make a comparison? You know, since we're making them and all? http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif

[PJ]

Cyclops is a fucking cyclops... well, ok, he has a fucking visor. He's totally not Ryu, no way http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_wacko.gif

[Genoa]

D; .... wow.... this has gotten quite ugly >_________>
ANyways, I was just stating originally that it would be nice if they had an additional class that's ... (well I don't want to compare to a HUmar ... I'll get flamed D; ) that has similar statistics to Guntecher but with guns removed and melee replaced.

And with Wartecher, I totally agree with the fact that Attack techs should be enforced, there's a nice amount of TP backing them up and they just so happen to be able to use good melee weapons as well. They also get some nice guns imo, Bow, card, (shadoog soon). Just carry extra weapons with you. You don't HAVE to use only 6 >_>

[blargh4242]

in with the new, out with the old...ok?

So enough with the F*cking HUmar stuff already

[Syl]

You do know GT has the 3rd lowest ATP in the game, a melee version would be pretty much a Protranser with techs.

[Genoa]

ugh I meant like, the basis of having low tech PA's and High bullet PA's. Sorry, I'm not being very specific here. And it wouldn't really need high ATP if it's going to have support techs, you can beef yourself up and lower the enemy.

[SolomonGrundy]

A bunch of classes don't exist:

HUmar

HUcaseal (HUcassys had the third highest EVP in PSO)

Either fighting FO (FOmar/l) - come AoI AT may come pretty close.

RAcaseal (there are no rangers with uber DFP)

[ShadowTFF]

I play as a Protranser currently and believe me, low stats that are similar to a transer or a guntecher would maul any class that can't be ranged. Even as a class level 9 I swear by my bow.

[imfanboy]

On 2007-09-25 20:59, MegamanX wrote:
D; .... wow.... this has gotten quite ugly >_________>
ANyways, I was just stating originally that it would be nice if they had an additional class that's ... (well I don't want to compare to a HUmar ... I'll get flamed D; ) that has similar statistics to Guntecher but with guns removed and melee replaced.


Well, (as we all know) AotI will raise the limit of support Technics to 30 (minimum) for ALL classes that can cast them.

Plus, it'll give WT level 30 Photon Arts, and a boost in the ATP and the HP department, if memory serves - bringing them even close to the Hunter classes of old.

[Zorafim]

On 2007-09-25 20:36, Hikaru-san wrote:
This IS NOT PSO. Just because it shares the same title doesn't mean it should be compared to it.


Why do people think this is an argument for anything? "You can't compare two things because they aren't the same thing." It's a terrible argument, especially considering how closely related PSU and PSO are. Come up with something else if you want to make a point.

[Scion]

On 2007-09-25 22:32, Zorafim wrote:

On 2007-09-25 20:36, Hikaru-san wrote:
This IS NOT PSO. Just because it shares the same title doesn't mean it should be compared to it.


Why do people think this is an argument for anything? "You can't compare two things because they aren't the same thing." It's a terrible argument, especially considering how closely related PSU and PSO are. Come up with something else if you want to make a point.



Can't, and shouldn't, are two very different words. I didn't say you can't compare the two, you could, and could come up with valid comparisons. It's just when it gets to a certain point with these comparisons and saying that things are EXACTLY the same as before is when it gets out of hand. That's when it shouldn't be done.

Regardless, this argument doesn't answer the OP's question (in which I apologize for going off on that tangent, but I felt it needed to be said).

To be honest, I really don't see a class similar to Guntecher, but only instead of replacing guns, you have strike weapons, actually working well with what we have right now. If the stats aren't just right, it could either be broken or unnecessary. And, I could imagine that finding that happy medium could be a difficult process.

But, I'm not one of the masterminds at ST, so I don't quite know how to work that out.

[Weeaboolits]

Ash would not approve...

[TetsuyaHikari]

On 2007-09-26 00:19, Ronin_Cooper wrote:
Jake would not approve...



Fix'd

[DelDevi]

Well, actually I always wondered why you shouldn't bcompare the 2 games. I mean no one would argue that for example Street Fighter 2 (SNES) is comparable to Street Fighter EX3 (PS2) despite of improvements/differences/etc - why argue here?

Back to the topic:
The old PSO classes were COMBINATIONS of race/class so that there is no point of trying to match them up with JUST the PSU jobs. One has to consider the race too to find the "equivalents" of the PSO classes.

For example if you want a ranger with much DFP(RAcaseal/RAcast) just a take a cast forteGunner, a HUmar could be "simulated" with a beast/cast WT(even more with the addition of swords in AotI) and so forth.

PSO just included so many classes to offer players a wide array of variations of the 3 basic PSO types. This allowed players to focus on different aspects of playstyle(more magic? less magic? more hp? traps? etc).

This concept is still there in the form of class/race combinations in PSU - you are basically choosing either a Force-type, Ranger-type or Hunter-type and give it the final adjustments by choosing your race.

Though PSU, in contrast to PSO, differentiates those classes even more by their equippable weaponry.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: DelDevi on 2007-09-26 04:20 ]</font>

[Weeaboolits]

On 2007-09-26 01:55, Kikumaru wrote:
http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w8/Ronin_Cooper/Forum/overhead.png

[-Ryuki-]

On 2007-09-25 19:56, Dragwind wrote:

On 2007-09-25 19:49, RyukiZero wrote:
Last I checked, WarTecher WAS the definition of PSU's HUmar. Especially in AoI.



Checked? Where did you check this? It was never clamied that Wartecher WAS the definition as you say to be the PSU humar. Not in AoI either. Humar had NO where as close as the teching power that WT has.

That's just a complete fail statement...I can't believe you really said that.



I wasn't really looking at the stats when I said what I did. Rather, I was thinking more of what they were able to use, in terms of weaponry and PA's. A HUmar was able to use a wide-variety of weapons, while being able to use techs (even if they were low-leveled compared to say.. a RAmarl).

When I first joined PSU (last year in October), talk about WT being a sucky class went around. I looked at what WT could do (but never played it personally at the time) and automatically thought "Yeah, that's definitely a HUmar-ish class right there".

So hey, if I said something stupid, I apologize, considering you're the WT expert.

[Weeaboolits]

Isn't Wartecher closer to HUney? what with the powerful techs and all? I'm offline, so I don't actually know.

[-Ryuki-]

I never played a HUnewearl, but that sounds more plausible than me saying they're closest to HUmar.

[Neith]

On 2007-09-25 20:32, Pillan wrote:

On 2007-09-25 20:28, ShadowTFF wrote:
Seriously. This is two different games, despite the whole idea of ranged, melee and magic classes. If HUmar fits the WT bill, then tell me what PSO class would qualify as a Figunner.


HUcaseal



http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_lol.gif I was about to reply with that, until I noticed you beat me to it. I don't care what anyone says, nearly any class in PSU can be compared to the playstyle of a PSO class.

Fighgunner=HUcaseal
Wartecher=HUnewearl
Guntecher=Similar to RAmarl, especially come AoI
Fortefighter=HUcast
Fortegunner=Any RA class really.
Fortetecher=FOnewm/FOnewearl
Acrofighter=From the stats, again like HUcaseal
Acrotecher=FOmarl/FOmar or HUnewearl?

That's how I think of the PSU classes anyway. I think it's hard to not see the resemblence to PSO, even if the actual battle system is different- though even that has similarities (3-hit combos anyone?)

I'm not saying PSU is PSO, or vice versa, but there are similarities, and this still is a Phantasy Star game, which has clearly drawn on aspects of PS/PSO. To totally dismiss that PSU is anything like PSO you might choose to do, but I can see a lot of similar areas everytime I play.

[DelDevi]

Isn't Wartecher closer to HUney?

I never played a HUnewearl, but that sounds more plausible than me saying they're closest to HUmar.
HUnewearl and HUmar are COMBINATIONS of job/race - you gotta include the RACES too. Like I said it's no use of trying to pin the PSU jobs on the PSO classes without considering the particular race.
That's why you both are right in a way. Consider Beast/Cast WT (usually) more HUmar-like and Human/Newman WT more HUne like.

[Sazan]

I would like to see a WT-like class with more melee power and less magic power.

S rank: sword, knuckles,...
A rank: axe, wand,...
skill 30 or 40, attack tech 10, support tech 20 or 30