Pillan you know, I really think you should shut up, I don't think a forte elitist with no AT experience should have made this thread.
Requesting somebody else make the real AT thread.
Pillan you know, I really think you should shut up, I don't think a forte elitist with no AT experience should have made this thread.
Requesting somebody else make the real AT thread.
As I’ve stated once before, I’m not perfect and everyone can post opposing theories and list their own ideas. I’m not an expert on the class, but I am an expert on looking at numbers and giving a good estimate of how much damage you’ll actually be doing. If the numbers presented before me happen to change in the final, then maybe something different will happen, but right now that’s how things really are.
This thread is made to debate theories and back them up with proof based on experimentation and calculations. Not everyone’s going to agree with you, but it’s by voicing these conflicting ideas and throwing in more and more details that allows us to learn and come to much more accurate conclusions about the class. It is your right to run off to another thread where all those posting agree with you, but you’re not going to learn anything that way.
I’m also curious as to what made you assume I’m a “forte elitist”. To be honest, the only class I dislike is WT, but even I can see why it would appeal to a lot of people and be a decent choice. I’ve already gone through the reasons why I like all the other classes and deem them balanced with the fortes in terms of usefulness, so I won’t bother going through that again.
Plus, you know, just because I started the thread doesn’t mean it’s mine. I was really hoping everyone would voice their opinions and ideas, as has been done so far. Creating another thread that will lead to the same conflict seems sort of counterproductive.
But that’s my thoughts on this matter and hopefully my last aside on this subject. Let’s get back to the topic.
Forgive the double post, but I forgot to add something very important to aT which seems to have gotten lost in my low damage explanation.
Though you’re losing like 15% damage efficiency in melee, ranged, and technique damage, you’re buffing the entire party for an additional 5%. So if you were in a team with 3 other players, buffing them has automatically made up for the damage lack. In a full party, an aT’s support power increases the efficiency far beyond anything you could get with an fT. That extremely high efficiency can be further increased with the use of Zalure.
So, yeah, I rate aT higher than fT if there is just 1 in the party.
Posting here because my thread got locked due to those who haven't seen or played the class starting arguments.
Whoa, wht's this negligible amount? I thought you were one of the advocates of level 21+ skills and the damage mod on the third combo? No? You contradict yourself by at one point saying that the bulk of the damage is on that third skill then later calling it a "negligible amount." WT gets a far greater array of melee weapons than AT and is clearly focussed on the melee side. No I do not know why Sega decided to make WT have lvl 3 hunter and level 5 force reqs. It's causesd a lot of confusion with how the class is meant to play.aT actually does do a negligible amount less melee damage than WT, even with the buffs and debuffs taken into account. Given that WT has access to S rank twin daggers and the third combo of Renkai, the WT will always do more damage/time than an aT with melee.
Why.You could label aT as a safer fT for soloing, but I wouldn’t recommend using this class for heavy technique damage in a party and I’d say stick to the white mage/paladin job (buffing your party, debuffing the enemies, healing when necessary, and doing a little damage when freed from your other duties).
Seriously, what does the AT do when they are not supporting? Twiddle their thumbs?
What's with this "little damage." Have you played the class? No? Well let me tell you, they do more than compentent damage. I know you and Tra think that 80% the damage of forte=crap for damage but I simply don't get where you are coming from.
Hell I'm evebn seeing arguments that GT is totally gimp compared to forte based on all of what, 20% less BASE damage, equating to about 10% when most weapons are equipped providing you don't play a bloody newman.
To me, that means jack. And when you factor in that GT gets S rank in arguably the highest damaging ranger weapon (crossbow), plus the fact GT can SE to the same rate as fG and will be able to buff themselves with 21 buffs when soloing in AoI I'll take GT over forte any day. But that's just me and there's still people calling me gimp. Bar my level 10 fortegunner friend who can see the minor difference in damage and knows it doesn't matter squat.
All I can say is that any FT player who thinks that 17% damage on them alone vs 7% extra over the entire party of potentially 6 people is the better equation must have a pretty damn lofty opinion of their damage output.You could do about the same damage either way as a Newman, but I’d say switch back to fT in a party since you don’t really have to worry about being attacked by enemies in that situation and you gain an extra 17% damage efficiency (even more with element bonus taken into account) while only sacrificing around 7% efficiency per party member between buffs and debuffs.
Hey I have a level 200 FOmar, which ain't a world of difference. I didn't like FOmarl because of the stupid way she wiggled her ass though. So are you telling me AT wiggles their ass too? I guess they must do, since you know so much about them.Don’t play this class if you didn’t like FOmarl in PSO.
I can't say I've tried cast or beast FT either but that doesn't change the fact they do 2/3rds the damage of newman with best equips on both.I guess I’ll have to ask now how many of you guys actually tried Beast or Cast aT and actually compared the speed of the party moving through the mission to that of Newman or human aT?
I've seen, OK no. I've PLAYED AT. Might as well come clean, I logged into my friend's account for a day and used his char that he levelled from 1 to IIRC 40 as AT. You use the whip to immobilise. You use tech to damage. You mix melee and tech sure, but only in the best situations, and tech is still your higheast overall damage. The ATP is too low to justify using it over tech in most scenarios.
Assumed? It's elementary. Cast and Beast TP modifier is about half that of newman, base. With best equipment on the FT class, cast and beast do 2/3rds the damage of newman. As AT will have roughly the TP and tech stats of FT NOW, you can expect that same equation for AT in AoI.That’s a rhetorical question. I know everyone on the pro-human/Newman extremist side of the aisle saw the TP and technique level were higher and assumed that instantly meant they would do more tech damage,
I apologize for not being more specific. It’s a negligible amount when they’re equipping a single hand weapon and using the same PA at their max level. When you change the weapon, the difference obviously becomes more vast. Yes WT does do more melee damage. I’m not trying to argue against that, but I will argue that a little less damage doesn’t make up for the 21% more damage the rest of the team is dealing with an aT in the party.On 2007-05-11 15:39, -Shimarisu- wrote:
Whoa, wht's this negligible amount? I thought you were one of the advocates of level 21+ skills and the damage mod on the third combo? No? You contradict yourself by at one point saying that the bulk of the damage is on that third skill then later calling it a "negligible amount." WT gets a far greater array of melee weapons than AT and is clearly focussed on the melee side. No I do not know why Sega decided to make WT have lvl 3 hunter and level 5 force reqs. It's causesd a lot of confusion with how the class is meant to play.
You’re supposed to attack obviously. I was simply saying “Zalure first”.On 2007-05-11 15:39, -Shimarisu- wrote:
Why.
Seriously, what does the AT do when they are not supporting? Twiddle their thumbs?
What's with this "little damage." Have you played the class? No? Well let me tell you, they do more than compentent damage. I know you and Tra think that 80% the damage of forte=crap for damage but I simply don't get where you are coming from.
Now you have to remember that, as you began to describe below, all the other partial classes get within 5% of the forte-classes damage and then make up that lack with something else. WT, PT, and aT are the only ones that clearly deal 15-20% less, but aT makes it up with support, PT makes it up with EX traps, while WT only gets an easier time soloing.
I would actually agree with you entirely there. Looking at the GT AoI beta stats, it is clearly more powerful than fG, aside from the lack of a few trap types. As I’ve said before, the only class that clearly lacks balance is WT. I like the way everything else has turned out.On 2007-05-11 15:39, -Shimarisu- wrote:
Hell I'm evebn seeing arguments that GT is totally gimp compared to forte based on all of what, 20% less BASE damage, equating to about 10% when most weapons are equipped providing you don't play a bloody newman.
To me, that means jack. And when you factor in that GT gets S rank in arguably the highest damaging ranger weapon (crossbow), plus the fact GT can SE to the same rate as fG and will be able to buff themselves with 21 buffs when soloing in AoI I'll take GT over forte any day. But that's just me and there's still people calling me gimp. Bar my level 10 fortegunner friend who can see the minor difference in damage and knows it doesn't matter squat.
That was actually more of a joke on the fact that you seem to think I’m anti aT. I really like the class, I just disagree with the way you recommend using them and say Casts and Beasts will do just as well as human or Newman while in a party.On 2007-05-11 15:39, -Shimarisu- wrote:
All I can say is that any FT player who thinks that 17% damage on them alone vs 7% extra over the entire party of potentially 6 people is the better equation must have a pretty damn lofty opinion of their damage output.
Exactly.On 2007-05-11 15:39, -Shimarisu- wrote:
Hey I have a level 200 FOmar, which ain't a world of difference. I didn't like FOmarl because of the stupid way she wiggled her ass though. So are you telling me AT wiggles their ass too? I guess they must do, since you know so much about them.
Yes, a Beast or a Cast will lose a lot of damage if they use techniques, but I was comparing technique damage to melee damage based on output/time. And, as was calculated earlier, a Buten Shuren-zan spamming Beast aT deals more than a Dambarta spamming Newman. Obviously if you were going to play Cast or Beast, you’d want to focus on the 1 hand melee aspect.On 2007-05-11 15:39, -Shimarisu- wrote:
I can't say I've tried cast or beast FT either but that doesn't change the fact they do 2/3rds the damage of newman with best equips on both.
And, yeah, Cast and Beast clearly suck as fT since that class has a level 1 skill limit, low ATP and ATA, and is too weak to take advantage of cards. I’m not here to argue against that. The difference is that the class can clearly melee and deal technique damage in this case.
It has more ATP than a PT or GT on the current system and only 4% less than a WT right now. If that’s the case, you might as well say those classes can’t deal any decent melee damage either.On 2007-05-11 15:39, -Shimarisu- wrote:
I've seen, OK no. I've PLAYED AT. Might as well come clean, I logged into my friend's account for a day and used his char that he levelled from 1 to IIRC 40 as AT. You use the whip to immobilise. You use tech to damage. You mix melee and tech sure, but only in the best situations, and tech is still your higheast overall damage. The ATP is too low to justify using it over tech in most scenarios.
Techniques are potentially your highest damage, but how realistically do you get 6 targets in your gi- or dam- tech range? That’s why I have said aT’s melee only outdamages its techniques in what I consider the standard party situations. Change the situation and you can clearly be right.
GT can't. Melee on GT to me should be used solely after you infect and tip something over so it can't attack and block. The only time I melee as GT is in solo A rank missions for time. On large monsters which are bullet resistant. In party missions I concentrate on the wand in my other hand instead.On 2007-05-11 16:11, Pillan wrote:
It has more ATP than a PT or GT on the current system and only 4% less than a WT right now. If that’s the case, you might as well say those classes can’t deal any decent melee damage either.
WT will get level 30 melee in AoI, plus can equip the following:
Spear
Twin sabers
Knuckles
Twin daggers
Daggers
Sabers
Claws
Twin claws
Whip
Might have missed something here but I'm going off the top of my head. AT can equip:
Sabers
Twin daggers
Dagger
Whip
(And gets only level 20 PAs)
HUGE difference in melee potential right there, the 4% extra damage of WT really is not the clear winner here.
It really is NOT a good idea to concentrate on melee for AT. ESPECIALLY when you consider that after bonus, a human AT will not be wielding much less ATP power than cast, yet will have almost double the base TP. And this is a melee SECONDARY class. Hell, I think the RANGED part of it will probably be more useful.
Well see how many idiots crawl out of the woodwork when we find out this class is 5 FO, 3 RA req shall we? Because that's probably going to be the case.
In that earlier statement, I was simply comparing it to the current WT. WT doesn’t deal that great damage right now, but it’s balanced because it has the second highest possible buff level and it’s only lacking at most 10% ATP on all of its photon arts. If you buff and spam Buten Shuren-zan and Gravity Strike as a WT right now, you actually can deal a decent amount of damage. The same will be true of aT for slightly different reasons (this time the highest buff level).
I clearly agree with you that the AoI beta WT has a higher damage potential because of weapon distribution right now. And, when S ranks become all that matter, WT will still clearly outdamage aT because of the last move of Renkai. But this doesn’t say anything about aT’s technique damage compared to WT’s melee damage, just that aT deals a bit less with melee.
Now, when we compare aT’s maximum damage potential, that clearly says it will do more technique damage than anything else (this is also true for WT), making a Newman the best in a situation where you can reach that potential. So, as I’ve already stated, in a party where you won’t get more than 2-3 targets in your technique range at any give time, it becomes questionable which type will win in terms of damage.
Also, let’s not base a class’s damage potential on its requirements. I mean, PT requires 5 levels of Force and it clearly doesn’t excel in (or use) technique damage. Regardless of what the requirement is, the calculation remains true as long as the AoI beta aT stats remain true.
If you’re playing Newman then you gain a lot of flexibility because techniques and the damage heavy skills do about the same amount of damage. If you play anything else, you lose some (read as take a huge hit in) technique damage and gain more melee. However, how often is that flexibility that important? Will an aT ever really need technique damage over melee?
If you solo, the answer is clearly yes and you’ve once again entered the regime where playing as a human or Newman aT becomes extremely important, but in a party this is almost never the case. Your average team will have at least one ranger and a few hunters and there’s no enemy in this game that takes half melee and ranged damage and is immune to both burn and infection. And, in the case that one does appear in the sequel, you can always add an fT to your party to take care of that.
But you’ll be making your aT and I’ll be making mine when the class is released. Even though we don’t agree, we should both describe potential play styles so everyone will be able to gain some ideas of their own. That is this topics purpose, after all.
Let’s just agree to disagree, end this aside, and move on to describing potential damage maximization strategies based on race choice.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Pillan on 2007-05-11 17:13 ]</font>
Since this is the nth "Official" AT thread, here are some excerpts that sum up the best of what I've read about how to organize your weapons and play as an AT:
On 2007-04-20 02:03, Sounomi wrote:
S rank Saber, S rank Dagger, S rank Madoog - These are pretty much the bread and butter weapons for the class. You use both in combat switching constantly depending upon situations at hand (or what you feel like doing in many cases). It's a strange playing style, yes, but one I enjoy alot. I personally don't care to stick to the same type of attack all the time (probably my minor ADD). For people that do like combat like that, it may be a little hard to understand, I guess.
S rank Whip - This is more of a support and mob handling weapon. I haven't really figured it out completely yet but it does go nicely with a madoog with a ra tech on it for larger mobs.
S rank Twin Dagger - This rather goes against the normal playing style but I guess they put it in so the class could have at least one strong melee weapon type for cases that would call for such.
S rank Card, Handgun - These are off hand weapons and go nicely with wands that are main hand. Being able to at least inflict some SEs and while running around spamming Resta and such is nice, even if the damage can't compare to the normal combat style. High level bullets would primarily be for the SEs. Yes cards only get SE 2, but the rate of infliction goes up with the level. fTs would have high level bullets for the same reason and it is a rather common practice with many support oriented fTs to use a card alongside a wand with Resta and Reverser. The same would apply here. Handguns aren't exactly that strong and cards are too slow to inflict that high of damage compared to the other guns that the true gunner classes have access to.
A rank Twin Handgun - Quick SE infliction and trap killing. Probably not much else to it. Being two handed rather limits what you can do and being A rank limits the power alot. The normal combat style would easily do more to anything but stuff that's only weak to ranged, in which case cards would probably do more damage. ATs also don't have Shadoogs for this purpose, which would conflict anyways.
A rank Wand - This thing to go along side the card and handgun and what you slap Resta, Reverser, and the debuffs on. As well as to help make a virtual rod of sorts for complete buffs. Offensive techs go to the Madoog to be used along side combat and I think the way they made wands A rank helps to support that notion.On 2007-05-04 11:52, RedCoKid wrote:
How often do madoogs run dry when you're balancing offensive techs (on madoog) with heals/buffs/debuffs (on wand) in a large party?Note: Cometarac(10) alone will have 1182PP according to PSOW's item database.On 2007-05-04 12:08, Itsuki-chan wrote:
fT with rod = 7pp per tick
AT with wand/madoog = 19pp per tick (8 pp per tick on the madoog, and 11 pp per tick on the wand).
This allows you to cast far more, assuming you mix the two around, and allow them to regen while running. Lets say you get 50ticks before you run out of pp (for both).
Halarod pp = 1368
With pp regen = 1718
Wand+madoog pp = ~850 (forget exact numbers, estimating here)
With pp regen = 1800
On 2007-05-04 12:08, Lyrise wrote:
Consider this. The best Madoog I had in beta was a 6 star grinded to 7, it had roughly 450 PP at best. SInce madoogs can generate techs faster than any other weapon, you're probably going to want to use low cost techs, and even then its going to drain fast. Support spells? Since the cost of the boost techs are 48PP each at lv21-30 (consider you no longer have reduction as AT), that's well over 1/10th of your PP right there.
That said, you have the right idea, but only as long as its fairly low cost. stuff like foie 31, that costs only 15 PP so its not that bad. But stuff like Megid, which will run you a full 96PP? Forget it.I'm still planning to set stuff up like this:On 2007-05-04 14:41, Sounomi wrote:
Lyrise says it best. On my aTs on the beta I only used low cost fast techs like Foie, Diga, and Ra techs. Those are what work best with the classes playing style and ST pretty much forces onto you via the lower PP on Madoogs.
tech debuff/melee
tech shield
card heal
tech buff
tech buff
card revive
Buffs on 2 separate wands work okay. You can switch while the spell is hitting without missing a beat as long as you've preloaded at the start of a block.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: RedCoKid on 2007-07-05 13:35 ]</font>
So no one's certain of the class level requirements for Acrotecher yet? ('cause I'd like to start working toward one now) What were the requirements in the Beta?On 2007-05-10 02:14, -Shimarisu- wrote
It's quite likely going to be lvl 5 FO, lvl 3 RANGER requirement IMO.
There were no requirements for Acrotecher in the beta. Honestly, I expect both the Acro-classes to have the same requirement as Protranser though, but there's no way to verify this at the time. All we can do is guess.
It’s really not hard to max all the basic classes in a couple Crimson Beast S or S2 runs (or any party or S2 mission), so you can just do that to prepare.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Connect With Us