Browse forums 
Ankama Trackers

Single-target and area masteries

By [Ankama]WAKFU - ADMINISTRATOR - April 18, 2023, 16:00:00
AnkaTracker Announcements
Reactions 96
Score : 132
If someone wants to be "The Fastest Dungeon cleaner in the West" and suck for destroy a unique enemy, or "The Real Boss Smasher" but clean the dungeon rooms like somebody than are 30 levels behind him why is this a problem, it's THEIR choice, it has consequences and benefits, why Ankama have to say "No, u can't play like that" (After years of say: Yeah, u can play like that), like another say in this post, there are just a lot of player than don't what to chooise, wants the same damage than the player than have a specialized build and the others have to pay it.
Elimite ST/AoE feel so aleatory, the argument than difencenly from Melee/Distance doesn't limite your deck is untrue, that depends of the class and u play style.
The Enutrof can play ST for don't be obligated to go Drhell and haven't the unique option of do damage in contact, even if his build is ST and Melee have options thanks to the existence of ST, with this change he have to change his entyre deck and playstyle.
Even the Iop, the "melee king" can play ST for a Air/Earth Build with the Range spells for use it when the ocassion amerity it; with this change to be full melee diferencily to now with a Cra of ST/Range build using explosive and do a decent mount of damage they are gonna make 0 damage, this way of play is gonna be totally useless.
Sacro ST for use the Air element, Panda of AoE, there are a lot of playstyle, a lot of OPTIONS, they are less? i guess, i have no idea, in mi group the are mayority but that's just my experience, the are not "meta"? not gonna lie, i have no idea of the meta, but so what? the "options" of them is less valuable than the "flexibility" of the ones don't what to chooise? (and actualy have the option of make a build that's adapt to them without this change).
Frankly, if they are going to eliminate ST/Zone they also must eliminate Distance/Melee and thus do not diddlydoo these players, and also make extra step to be "Dofus Next generations".

I insist, the existence of ST/AoE is not a problem. If the player feels that he has to be forced to specialize, there are other ways that surely cost less work than this.
-Rework the """solid""" characteristics system.
-Categoryce the equip for the Smithmagic to be something like "Defensive": Doble resis (Boots, Breastplate, Epaulettes, Helmet) "Offensive": Doble Damages (Weapon, Belt, Cloak, Amulet) and "Utility: Dobles the other characteristics" (Rings), and the player decides with damage what in his build with no penalty for not opting for a specialized build.
-Add some equips
5 -1
Score : 3147
I would prefer if the Devs finish their current class balancing projects before trying to start yet another long-term project.

The more concurrent projects you decide to take on, the more projects you leave half-baked, and the harder it will be to properly balance things... let alone finish what you started.

Let's take Huppermage for example.

They recently got a huge revamp. Their Heart of Light (Firey Heart) effect forces players to cast spells at their max range in order to generate QB. Out of their 20 elemental spells, 15 of them have a modifiable range.

Even their non-modifiable range spells have max ranges of beyond melee range (1-2 cells away). If you change the mastery system to melee / ranged only... melee Huppermages will never benefit from generating QB in Heart of Light (Firey Heart).

This may seem like a minor thing to you in the grand scheme of your vision... but all these little "eh, it's just a minor inconvenience" things add up over time. Also, if you had done the mastery changes before the revamp, you probably would have given them a different Heart of Light (Firey Heart).

Now, you need to either ignore this ability altogether for people who want to be a melee Huppermage, or you need to go back and redesign it.

My point is: Changing the mastery system isn't just about changing gear (base stats, runes, sublimations)... which is an ordeal in and of itself.

Classes will also be affected by how their spells and passives work. Are you prepared to update each class to align with the mastery changes? Are you willing to do that?

• Which classes get priority to be updated with the new mastery changes when they go live?

• How much will this delay the current projects that have been in place for YEARS: 1) Saying bye-bye to the control stat; 2) adding 3rd bar spells; 3) adding passive maluses? Eni, Eca, Sadida, Panda, Enu are still waiting for basic revamps.

• How long will you actually make sure that each of the classes are updated to the new mastery system before you get tired of doing it and start another project?

Please prioritize your current backlog before adding new tasks to it.
20 0
Score : 267
Yeah I'll have to agree, before moving to this the classes you mentioned should be brought up to date. I'm not sure about Panda though, they've been reworked every year or every other year. Let's not tempt fate.
0 0
Score : 3874
Raheru3#5832|2023-04-20 11:55:12
Yeah I'll have to agree, before moving to this the classes you mentioned should be brought up to date. I'm not sure about Panda though, they've been reworked every year or every other year. Let's not tempt fate.

Pandawa has not been reworked every year... the last rework it got was when deck update launched which was in like 2015. It's gotten small nerfs and small changes here and there, that's about it.
1 0
Score : 267
My bad, you're right. We need justice for Panda, Sadi, Eni, Eca, and Iop.
1 0
Score : 139
Interested in seeing how my spell options open up once they are no longer restricted by ST or AOE. And I'm all for some of the lower level gear getting a second look. there are many cases where some gears are just massively outclassed by their counterparts in the same tier, despite having the same niche. It's just a mess figuring out builds when all the gears aren't neatly at their max level for the tier.
3 0
Score : 4251
I see that Ankama is taking the "Dungeon Finder" solution to everything. 

Instead of fixing the problem, they just remove the problem and pretend it doesn't exist, expecting the players to adapt to the changes. Amazing, really. 
11 0
Score : 7283
kiki12333#7501|2023-04-21 13:52:40
I am in complete agreement with your analysis. I would also like to add that if they still want to encourage diversity in gameplay by not having a system that restricts players to use mono/melee or other double combos, they could just change the stats ratio.


Right now we are on a 2/3 ratio for the equipment from the example:
100 melee vs 150 melee/zone mastery

They could just change this ratio to a 13/15 for example:
130 melee vs 150 melee/zone mastery

And do a similar change for the elemental mastery.

This change could be considered as powercreep. However, the upper limit is untouched making the total damage output unchanged. At least I hope. I might have disregarded the interaction of an item possessing a mix  of melee and rear mastery but :p. I am not the gamedevs. At the same time, I am now realising that this change is just half of what they originally planned so it can't be that bad.

They could, in the same patch, also make a quick change to the berserk mastery. For example, putting it at the same level as the rear mastery or making it based on % of HP lost.

After the changes, players might switch to a single mastery focus (perhaps even melee or distance). They could then gather data from these players about their spell utilization and whatnot for a more complete project later.

I give this example because I wish that they either implement a simple fix that does not break the structure of the game while still going forward with their original idea of pushing players to diverse their playstyles, or do a complete overhaul at a later date, when the current projects stated by aqualad are finished.

From what I understood their plan is to turn
80 general vs 100 melee vs 150 melee zone mastery
100 general vs 150 melee mastery

Which sure is technically power creep, but is only a powercreep in terms of flexibility rather them maximum mastery you can achieve, since it just buffs the weaker gear and the stronger gear stays basically the same
2 -2
Score : 18107
I wonder if Melee and Distance will also be modified now or in the future. Hold up, take your mouse out of the dislike button, I'm not suggesting their rework or removal but I feel like currently overspecializing your character by going full AoE/ST + Melee/Distance is rewarding in terms of damage, but now that AoE and ST will be removed, distance and melee (as stats) will feel a little bit... boring?

Both stats are a no brainer for some classes and don't need too much strategy when picking either: Melee for Iop/sacrier/pandawa/ougi/etc and Distance on cra/xelor for example. For some classes it is an obvious choice (maybe with the exception of Huppers and Foggers).

Maybe the AoE and ST replacements on the Strength section will make things more interesting when investing points and less of a binary choice, otherwise everyone will just go Distance or Melee + elemental mastery which is not bad, but I'd like to have more options available to complement the build and keep things more dynamic without the fear of losing too much damage due to the ratio. 


@cody5: "From what I understood their plan is to turn
80 general vs 100 melee vs 150 melee zone mastery
100 general vs 150 melee mastery"

If new stats are added to replace AoE and Melee, I wonder if they are also considering to add those new stats into existing items or if they will create new equipment on every level range with them. Like, let's say they add Front Mastery (increased damage when attacking the enemy in the front), will this new stat be added to an existing item such as Cra Bow or will they create a new set of items with this new stat.

There isn't info yet on this but, curious
1 -1
Score : 1746
I believe that some day we will have only special masteries(Berserk, Rear, crit) and elemental masteries. Like you pointed out, ST and Zone existed to allow the players to take their build to the limit while restraining themselves. Now that we will no longer have two of those restrains, maybe the strategic factor will be more based on spells conditions. Like the Xelor that has some spells unable to be used on melee, the Sram that have an easy time dealing rear damage, and the sacrier that benefits from berserk.
0 0
Score : 388
I agree very much with T1Gerator. No niche gimmicks, no conditionals, just Elemental Mastery. It is right there. One reason why players like myself enjoy AoE and Single Mastery is because they allow you to be flexible with your elemental spells and many, if not most classes (especially after reworks) have become increasingly complicated with more conditionals making it harder to synergize spell effects and making you more reliant on gear with broad stats.
1 -1
Score : 3208
Bluhen#6777|2023-04-18 15:11:02
If everything goes as planned, from what I've read, builds wouldn't lose damage and the removal of the ST and AoE stats would be compensated in the item due to their Weight. But sublimations on the other hand, I feel like it will be tricky to come up with new effects that don't ruin certain playstyles

yeah but how would you know if your gear will not be turned into the output mastery you dont use?
example: if you use pure aoe items (like: Corrupted Mail Har) mixed with other to play with brut gem in melee, how sure are you those aoe items will not be turned to distance disrupting your brut build? or viceversa for those who use aoe items and play distance get all turned to melee; we will have same output BUT FORCED TO PLAY ANOTHER STYLE OR SPENT MUCH MORE KAMAS/TIME TO REBUILD OUR CHARACTER. 

That is the point, how could DEVs justify an unwanted nor needed change at the cost of every players time/kamas (?) Most of the player who say "the output will be the same" doesnt take that into account, so, who will take their chances?
DEVS: ...feeling lucky?
8 -1
Score : 18107
That's a good question. Without any more info on the change we can only speculate but I guess Devs have the data to tell which items are the most used in which builds and tweak the bonuses based on that while keeping the item's Weight, so I doubt they would turn a Distance damage item into Melee or Support.

Brutality will be changed for sure there's no doubt in that, but they could do some changes while keeping the spirit of the Sub similar, it is an item designed for Melee AoE builds so maybe it could be changed into: At the start of the battle, if Melee is your highest mastery then your AoE and Melee spells gain 20% more damage. They could keep the item effect similar without the actual need of an AoE stat. You could adjust your gameplay through Enchantment.

Just a suggestion, I think there should still be a way to adjust your character towards a certain gameplay even if both stats get removed
1 -2
Score : 267
I throw my hat behind the return of just having elemental damage on gear. Every other specialization should be placed on sublimations and passives.
3 -1
Score : 12320
i also agree. if we had one extra special passive slot for a 'core' passive, from which we could choose role-affirming passives (passives that boost dist, or dist/st, or melee, or melee/aoe, or hp/res) then specialisation would be as easy and as modular as just choosing what you want to be or do on a fight by fight basis.

also, the addition of fixed damage and fixed resistances on gear would help diversify the roster of items a lot.

unrelated to the above, i'd also like to see sublimations or equipments that target our class spells and change them. like legendary effects from diablo or the class sets in dofus. the dofus class sets are really fun, but often poorly utilised because one item needs to have a roster of effects that you use and we can't control what effects those items give. so it would be nice to have a way to take individual class set-like effects and apply them to our gear. dofus touch manages to do this by having them as trophy effects, so you can equip just the one that you want without sacrificing an entire ring or hat.

as a bonus, depending on what class you are, it would show you something different. where a huppermage would see 'downpour is no longer line of sight', a sadida might see 'bramble now always critically hits'. and then each one of these has a chance of being valuable, and therefore worthy of selling if it's bad or good for your class in particular. the market would love them smile
3 -2
Score : 131
Bluhen#6777|2023-04-24 19:10:32
I kind of think that's an interesting idea but that would really shake things up ohmy but it also makes sense,for me now that AoE and ST are going to get removed, melee and distance feel kind of boring stats to invest Stat Points on, a binary choice unless they add new stats to A).- replace AoE and St and B ).- actually compete or complement the 2 masteries

I do think one potential option for mastery could be a mid-ranged one allowing a character to sit at the far end of melee and the close end of range (not sure what the specific cell range should be). In my view this would be decent competition and keep the options from feeling too binary.

I say this because some players choose to invest only in single target/area of effect so that they don't need to worry about distance from the target. Presumably this means that these players are moving between the far end of of melee and the close end of range.

cody5#2705|2023-04-27 08:48:35
I guess one option could be
1 melee
2-4 midrange
5+ long range
But the problem is that at lower levels before you can get all that bonus range, most spells just don't qualify for long range mastery

Not quite what I had in mind, what I intended was to keep distance and melee as they are with the mid range mastery creating overlap. Probably a niche idea, but I could see some players being able to take advantage of it.

The rationale for this idea is that there are players who ignored distance/melee mastery in favour of single/area masteries so they don't need to care about there distance. Logically, this means that these players are moving between both melee and distance thus would probably spend most of their time in the 2-4 space. While it wouldn't be as flexible positioning wise as just going single/area mastery, it would allow some players to occupy this overlapping area while opening up spell options.

Of course, this would only have potential on a small number of classes or play styles, but it could be useful none the less.
This being said, I'd be perfectly happy if the masteries were just reduced to distance and melee since general mastery is capable of creating greater flexibility at the cost of less mastery.


Bluhen#6777|2023-04-27 12:24:10
Xelors had a mid-range passive called Violent Omens that most people disliked because it forced you to deal damage from cells 3-5 to get the DI% bonus. Now, I don't know if it got reworked because the class needed more indirect dmg or because players didn't like it but it was too situational in my opinion.

I was one of the Xelor's that disliked Violent omens, but that was mainly because it didn't fit with the Xelor's identity in my opinion.
The recent Xelor changes have been a real treat.

I will add though that what I mean by mid range is not just the close end of distance, but rather an overlapping area that occupies both the far end of melee and close end of distance.

I am not sure if the idea is any good, but I can imagine it having a niche use at the very least
1 -2
Score : 7283
I guess one option could be
1 melee
2-4 midrange
5+ long range
But the problem is that at lower levels before you can get all that bonus range, most spells just don't qualify for long range mastery
0 0
Score : 3442
The problem isn't the gear changing, its that it undermines the last important character building choice there is. Every class you need to think, am i going to be aoe or single target. Melee and distance are already class specific in most cases.

The fear is that it dumbs the game down into evey class build being the same
2 -1
Score : 489
Im fine without single/area 
if ankama handle the balance between classes it would be more better
because sometimes i feel like "our buildings comes from items not spells" 
of course there are some classes weak spells so you dont need to area or other stats.
2 0
Score : 101
Are you going to buff elementary mastery+secondary mastery items as well, so that people who have builds around those don't have to start grinding for stuff all over again? 
0 0
Score : 89
Looking forward to seeing single target and area gone, no matter what replaces it, would be fun to be able to use any spell in deckbuilding
1 0
Respond to this thread