Browse forums 
Ankama Trackers

Devblog: Class Changes in 2020

By [Ankama]WAKFU - ADMINISTRATOR - December 13, 2019, 16:00:00

We've devised five revamps that we'd like to implement in the game from 2020. The aim of this article is to outline our main areas of work at the moment so as to get your feedback.

Hey, Siu here! I'm going to walk you through a Devblog in which you're the hero!

We've devised five revamps that we'd like to implement in the game from 2020. The aim of this article is to outline our main areas of work at the moment so as to get your feedback. Some of the passives and spells have already been designed, but these classes still require a lot of work and iterations. Warning: These revamps are in quite a pre-production state.

Let's get straight to the introductions…



The Xelor class suffers from complicated but shallow mechanics. The synergies between the spells and elements are unnatural. Many classic constraints are absent and contribute toward making it so you play a little all the time and in the same way. For example, the Dial is a tool that has no downsides. It makes it possible to move around freely over great distances for a small cost, with a very short recast time, and it provides extra damage. How could you play without it?

The class is competitive thanks to its strong potential for damage and its great freedom of action, which is quite the opposite of what you might expect when creating a Xelor.


The special thing about the Xelor class is that it'll begin combat with 12/12 WP. The Dial will require WP to move from cell to cell (instead of MP). The Current Hour mechanic is changing: It will move from hour to hour after each time the Xelor moves on the Dial and will provide a significant bonus when the Xelor is on it.

A Slowdown mechanic will make the Xelor class worthy of its nickname – the Master of Time. A stackable state can be applied, then consumed when the time's right. The Xelor will then remove a quantity of AP of equal value to the state level, and will regain 1 WP. Slowdown can be consumed every turn (or even several times per turn) to regain WP and make small reductions, or stack the state over several turns until it's possible to considerably reduce the target's AP.

  • Fire path: powerful damage but with casting and range constraints.
  • Water path: single-target damage and debuffs.
  • Air path: mobility.



A lot of the game's content is perfectly structured around its capabilities. It's pretty much the best offensive support in the game while being a tank with exceptional positioning and defense capabilities.


In theory, the Feca class would no longer stack its tank and protector roles. Combining passives will accentuate one of the two roles. Through some spells' specifics and passives, you'll be able to specialize much further in one role to the detriment of the other, or keep a reasonable balance between the two.

In theory, we'd like the Feca class to no longer be a tank and for it to instead help others tank. It's a big change for this class and the game in general because the Feca has a role that only it can master. Now we want to refocus on "protector" characters rather than those whose role is to be resistant all the time.

That way, a protector Feca would be further from the front line but could help their Iop, Ouginak, Sacrier, Pandawa and other friends – those who really need to be in close combat – survive many attacks. But it'll also be possible for you to remain the epitome of the tank role as at present, with the effectiveness required for the content, without being able to maintain the main support role at the same time.

Once the basics are redefined through the Feca, we'd like to expand this protector role to other classes. Through this revamp, we want to add a wide variety of class compositions for you to play in dungeons, while leaving the Feca as the primary representative of a crucial role.

The Feca would become capable of inflicting greater damage than it is currently. It could inflict consistent and decent damage without having a decisive burst capability.

  • Fire path: damage
  • Water path: glyphs (bonus/penalty)
  • Earth path: armor mechanics – armor and protection bursts, conditional armor (applying distance/close-combat barriers to allies)



We see an imbalance when the class's offensive capabilities are combined with high mobility, defense and protection capabilities, and infinite stabilization… In addition, the class lacks burst possibilities, and the Fire and Earth paths struggle to find where they fit in alongside the Stasis spells. There are concepts with an interesting theme and identity about this class, which are completely annihilated by a role consisting of using the few very powerful damage spells it has.


Stasis damage will become Light damage (like for the Huppermage). As a reminder, Light damage takes the character's highest Elemental Mastery into account to inflict damage in that element. Spells and passives will let you change elements dynamically through bonuses or conversions of Elemental Masteries. Blocks will still be there to tank or help tank, but you can no longer spend your whole turn on them to improve their effectiveness.

We'd like to enhance the choice between the Foggernaut's strong skills and allow for more advanced specializations without being able to stack roles as easily. The Foggernaut will still be able to stabilize, but just like other stabilization capabilities, it will have a duration and a recast time.

Two main mechanics will be distinguished:

  • Becoming a Fogginator increases and maintains High Pressure. The Foggernaut gains close-combat damage and Resistances with each turn.
  • Entering Turret mode increases and maintains Overheating. The Foggernaut gains ranged damage and Range with each turn.

We're already devising a passive to reinforce the transition from one mode to another, another one to switch them to set bonuses that wouldn't increase as much, and capabilities whose effect would vary according to the current mechanics. For example, a different block depending on Overheating or High Pressure…



It is very time-consuming and costly for us to produce balanced Summons for each new piece of content or content revamp. We also note that out of the dozens of monsters available, choices are systematically focused on the same ones, because it is impossible to reconcile the balancing of the monster itself and its Summons version. For example, a level-120 monster cannot be a viable choice for a level-160 player.

Developing a dynamic upgrade system (Summons would always take the level of the Osamodas) is unreasonable for a single class. This is why we decided to start with a generic Summons system whose capabilities can be determined by the Osamodas's passives and actives.


The Osamodas will only have a generic Summons with classic spells. By default, it'll be the Gobgob. Monsters in the ecosystem (not all!) can be captured in order to learn their appearances and apply them to the Summons. By default, the Osamodas would be more of a support class. It will have a strong potential to reduce its enemies' Resistances, with a rather classic Summons that can change and adapt according to the fight.

You'll find the "Dragosa" theme, which is a damage mode. It could even compete with the best classes in this register while having fewer tools available. A passive will limit the Osamodas's support capabilities and that of its Summons, but will increase its offensive potential in return (for example).

We started with the idea that the Osamodas's deck will also be that of its Summons: It will have between 20 and 30 passives, each with two effects – one that applies to the Osamodas and one to its Summons. Here are three small examples to help you visualize:

Passive 1

  • -20% Melee Mastery
  • Transmits 100% of Melee Mastery to the Summons

Passive 2

  • 50 Elemental Resistance
  • -2 Range for the Summons

Passive 3

  • -100% Dodge
  • The Summons unlocks the spell Release

It will also be possible to unlock spells for the Summons during combat, using the capabilities of the Osamodas itself. We really want to enhance the possibilities to personalize its creature, whether in appearance or in its passive and active capabilities.

Bear in mind that this is a very ambitious revamp that takes a lot of time to develop and balance in order to achieve something coherent. But it is necessary to do so, as maintaining creatures to capture is becoming increasingly problematic and time-consuming as time goes on. This will provide us with opportunities for the Sadida class in the future...


The revamp of the Osamodas would be accompanied by a revamp of the Control characteristic. The theory is: 1 Control point = 10% damage/heals and 50 Resistance for of the controller's Summons (values completely subject to change). The number of Summons on the battlefield would simply depend on capabilities on a case-by-case basis (for example: 1 Coney, 4 Beacons, 4 Portals, etc.). Class passives would increase this number, still on a case-by-case basis. You'd have minimum and maximum Control caps, and Control could even go into the negative.

Some class spells can increase or reduce control. For example, a boss could have 10 Control points and apparently very strong Summons, but reducing the boss's Control can weaken them.



This class is already interesting. We want to offer it more depth and specialization options. Its impact in fights varies between playing on your own, with three or six characters. We could revise its competitiveness upward in groups of six characters if necessary, but the problem is above all that the Masqueraider doesn't have many viable specialization options.


The Masqueraider will have support capabilities. It will no longer (or at least not primarily) heal, but will apply armor. Masks are changing: They will be free and a mechanic will unlock them in combat. They'll provide an immediate bonus to equipment (for one turn) and another bonus when you start your turn with them. You can wait until you unlock three masks in the fight and then put them on to take advantage of the three immediate bonuses, but you'll have to be careful to choose the order of the masks if you want to prioritize a particular bonus at the start of the turn. It'll keep its Double mechanic.

Psychopath Mask (damage)

When equipped: +2 AP (1 turn)
Worn at the start of the turn: A Fire spell removes 100 Elemental Resistance from the target.

Classic Mask (support)

When equipped: large amount of armor (infinite)
Worn at the start of the turn: A Water spell generates 1 WP on the target, +50% Armor given.

Coward Mask (positioner)

When equipped: +2 MP (1 turn)
Worn at the start of the turn: An Air spell pushes 4 instead of 2, and movement spells have modifiable range.

  • Fire path: close-combat/area-of-effect damage, offensive support capabilities (reducing Resistances, giving damage).
  • Water path: single-target damage, good range, theft of and giving armor, protection capabilities, defensive support.
  • Air path: mobility and positioning.



We've been thinking about the classes' passives. A lot of feedback from the community talks about a lack of choice:

  • Some passives provide better bonuses than others, or bonuses that have no strings attached.
  • Classes have too few passives, which limits both choices and the possibility to specialize.

In the long run, we'd like each passive to change the way you play.

Hypothetical example: The Feca class would have a Glyph spell, a 2-cell circle, Light damage, three turns to recast.

  • The "Improved Glyph" passive increases its size to a 3-cell circle and increases its recast time.
  • The "Hindrance Glyph" passive adds an MP reduction to the glyph, but reduces its damage by 30%.

This approach would allow us to add more passives to the classes. It would no longer be about choosing the strongest and most generic passives, but those that best fit your role and the capabilities you choose to play.

If we change the passives in this way, those that only provide damage or resistance bonuses would be replaced by passives that are more specific to the mechanics of their class.
By starting this project, we'll ensure that the classes still perform as well as they do currently (by reviewing the spells' characteristics, if necessary).
In the long run, we could remove common passives, as we believe they don't offer bonuses that are balanced from one class to another. Each class would then have between 15 and 20 unique passives.

What Is Your Opinion on Force of Will?

We don't currently have any plans to change Force of Will. For us, this is a relevant gameplay tool we work with to make interesting content. As a reminder, Force of Will is a characteristic that allows you to increase the reductions you make, but also to better resist those received. Over time, we're continuing to work on the mechanics of monsters specializing in reductions so they'll be richer.

We'd like to make it so that increasing Force of Will will only be possible with spells (and no longer with passives). We think that increasing Force of Will very significantly at a given moment is more strategically interesting – a one-off capability can shine if used at the right time.
Being strong in reduction every turn doesn't provide anything in terms of gameplay depth. Choosing when to make significant reductions is more interesting.
Limiting how often reductions are used balances them. We want keeping enemies at a distance to be a viable, very powerful strategy against enemies who are sensitive to this, but we don't want it to be systematic.

Is Indirect Damage Going to Change?

We want to harmonize indirect damage and the corresponding descriptions.

At present, there are many misconceptions going around the community about how it works, because it's not the same from one class to another, or even from one effect to another. It's a huge project with a lot of special cases, but in return, it would unlock many possibilities in terms of mechanics. It's conceivable that all indirect damage will follow certain rules:

  • Any damage that is not contained in a spell or weapon is considered to be indirect.
  • Indirect damage can override bosses' or monsters' invulnerabilities.
  • Indirect damage is increased or reduced by a real characteristic, displayed in the character sheet.

Some class passives could force indirect damage to take Melee or Distance Mastery, regardless of the distance between the caster and target.

Why These Classes Instead of Others?

Because the project manager plays them and wants to up them. Any other questions?

The Foggernaut and Xelor have abilities that are too powerful and sometimes incoherent with their gameplay.
The Feca and Osamodas revamps make it possible to bring new interest to all fights in the game and a new way to approach them.
The Masqueraider revamps could complement the Feca's by strengthening the protector role.

We know that other classes are waiting their turns (especially Sadida). We want to work on them, but priorities must be properly set.

Are These Areas of Work Set in Stone? Can Players Give Feedback the Team Will Take Into Account?

Nothing is really set in stone, even after a revamp is released. But it's impossible to please everyone – no matter what changes are made to the game, some players will prefer the old version and others will prefer the new one. You could discuss each class for 150 years and there still wouldn't be a consensus. The goal is to make the game more coherent, balanced, and interesting.

We trust you to express your point of view (first impressions, initially) on what we present you with through a survey you'll find at the bottom of this article. As usual, we'll read all your comments and we'll take them into account when making our decisions.

So What Kind of Feedback Would You Particularly Like?

We take everything. Discussions between players are often rich. We'd like first impressions, later impressions, impressions from players who don't play the class in question at all or who play it a lot… But there are still a few small traps to avoid. A classic remark we often read is that a spell that seems to be of little use or uncompetitive should gain an extra function. For example, hitting more if a target has a particular state, or unlocking an extra effect in combat depending on a condition.

For us, spells are tools. If you're having trouble hammering a nail, you shouldn't add a hammer function to your screwdriver – just use a hammer. We perfectly hear feedback on a spell that doesn't seem interesting to you, but if it's a spell that's effective in a sufficient number of content situations (for example, because it lets you play into a boss's mechanics), then it's perfectly justified for it to be among the class's spells.

In addition, reading feedback such as "yes but the panda can hit from moon to vulk and me just 2 cells" isn't really useful. Each class has its strengths and weaknesses, and comparing them doesn't add a lot, especially when they don't have the same role.

Are Smaller Balancings Planned in the Meantime, or Will We Have to Wait Until 2036 for You to Finish These Five Classes?

Some balancing for the other classes could indeed be envisaged. We may add or review a passive, an active… for some of the classes that need it. The Osamodas and Feca revamps may result in side-effect changes to other classes with similar roles.

Survey: We Want Your Opinion


Discuss the proposed changes in their dedicated forum thread

First Ankama intervention


Here's a summary of what questions we adressed in the Ankama Live.

You can watch the live (in english) here: link to the live.

Most common questions and feedbacks

Will we need to change all our equipment again with this update ?

We’ll do our best so that it’s not the case. Through this Devblog, we’ve explained that our focus was to add new gameplay possibilities… but we don’t plan to remove any of the existing one ! We’ll try and make sure to keep the current roles as possible specializations.

The Osamodas mastery transfer to its summon is a more complex topic, but we could very well keep it the way it is through a passive. Although our opinion at the moment is that this passive is currently unclear and not very interesting.


Why would you reduce the efficiency of these classes instead of increasing the capabilities of others ?

At first glance, we mostly have a few consistency issues with Xelor and Foggernaut. We would like to rework these two classes so that their gameplay is less systematic : you will need to take advantage of the classes mechanics to be very efficient.

Osamodas and Masque should have and overall up. Should we be totally truthful with you, there’s a lot of chances Feca will get a good nerf. We think it’s currently the best class in the game, it has a lot of strong options.

In a way, what makes some classes stronger than the others isn’t their brute power in one role, but their ability to have several roles at the same time, while being very efficient in every one of them.

For example, Feca can be an excellent Tank, an excellent defensive Support/protector, an excellent offensive Support, and even an excellent DD in some builds.

To balance this class, we don’t want to reduce the maximum power in the 3 roles, but rather to prevent Feca from cumulating its 3 roles at their maximum efficiency, without any downside. Others classes wouldn’t be able to be as interesting as Feca.

If we rework less competitive classes to this template (cumulating many powerful roles), a lot of classes would become too versatile. Our goal is that each class can play a role, and bring something in for the team. We can’t achieve this vision if characters are playing a lot of roles with maximum efficiency. THEREFORE it needs to be a priority.

We do care about revaluating the less competitive classes. It’s one of the goals of the « passive » revamp. We could implement that revamp separately from these five class revamps. The goal is to provide 20 passives to every class at the same time. We could offer multiple specialisations for Rogue to choose from, for example we could revaluate its direct game. We wouldn’t touch the core gameplay, the bomb mechanics that makes the class really shine over multiple turns, because it’s appropriate a certain amount of content. But switching passives could offer Rogue a way to be competitive in other contents.

Passives being more numerous and more « gameplay-related », we could add a lot of them as time goes on. In the current situation of 10 passive, we wouldn’t want to make 4 « direct damage oriented passive » on a master of indirect damage class, for example. Because then, it would impact the indirect damage role of the class by lessening the amount of passives he can choose.


Why are you even reworking classes ? Isn’t there anything else you could do, like debugging or adding content ?

I just can’t. I’m on a different team. As a Game Designer, I’m in charge of setting content : dungeons, quests, items… What I’m able to do is limited if I don’t have graphic designers or animators at my disposal.

Balancing classes is something I can do almost alone. Many players find it very important. It’s not cool for a lot of players to just play a class that’s significantly less competitive than another one through a game’s content. Besides, we think that adding more passives can allow you to more deeply interact with your character. It should be a valuable addition to the game. Changing your playstyle from one fight to another should be interesting, and we aim to improve the quality of some roles that the classes can take on as theirs.

We hope we can show you some examples soon. We would give you a list of around 20 passives for a couple of classes, so that we can have something more concrete to discuss together. About these classes that you would like me to give a try adding passives on first, I’m open to suggestions !

Anyway, back to the question. Game systems evolution (such as PVP, interfaces, client performances…) are tasks for Game Developers rather than Game Designers, at least on the practical implementation.

And our Developers are currently busy working on… something… that the community has been waiting for some time, and that will come out shortly.

Feedback on the 5 Devblog classes



A lot of feedback has been made on our proposal to make Stasis damage work as Light damage. You’re right, it was indeed weird and awkward from our part. We immediatly changed our approach on the matter. For now, we have two new leads we are serious about :
  • A water branch replaces the current Stasis branch. Stasis spells can either be unlocked in fight, or all Foggernaut spells deal Stasis Damage under certain conditions. It’s a dynamic and balanced path, that doesn’t betray the identity of the class.
  • The Stasis branch actually stays similar to what it currently is, but undergoes some gameplay adjustments that are necessary for balancing. We believe we are able to make something satisfying while keeping Stasis’ current behavior.

A few players also made points about the Motherfogger’s rigidity. It seems there was some kind of misundertanding between ourselves because we weren’t clear enough on the matter, so here’s the deal :

High Pressure is a bonus that increases Melee Damage, Block, and % Armor Given (for blockades). It’s a state, that will gain one level per turn.

When you cast Fogginator, you will gain a High Pression level. Fogginator also is a state on its own, that gives Resistance (100) and removes 1 max MP. You can deactivate Fogginator but keep the High Pressure increasing.

The same thing goes for the Motherfogger. You won’t need to stay on it to keep the Overheating mechanic going.


This class should cover a lot of possibilities.

You will be able to keep the current strong tank role of the Feca, or be a strong and reliable protector, but you won’t be able to keep both roles at their maximal potential. You will still be able to cumulate the two roles in a fight, in a more jack-of-all-trades manner because you won’t be as efficient as a character that specialized itself in one of the roles.

For the protector role, we would like to take some inspiration from the older versions of the Feca. Certain « Shields » could be activated in fights, to give you ways to adapt and respond to certain situations. The Tank role should stay close to what it looks like right now. 


The damage capabilities of the class should stay very good, although it will need to use more spells. Xelor is using the same few repetitive spell sequences at the moment. It will probably have some orientation where it can deal additional damage for each AP its target has lost. That way, we can have a synergy with the own AP removal mechanic of the class, and with any ally that can remove APs as well.

I hope it will give you more insight into what we want to do. You will still be able to play in a simple and efficient manner, but taking advantage of the Xelor’s defining mechanics will require a little proficiency.


We wanted to check the reactions from the community first, which is why we didn’t go deep into what the class would be able to actually do. The idea is definitely to give a LOT of possibilities for your Gobgob.

Let’s put it that way : The Gobgob starts the fight with 2-3 classical spells. One melee damage spell, one range damage spell, one support spell that gives a small armor or some resistance. You will be able to unlock a « spell set » during the fight on your summon, for example a healer spell set.

You will be able to switch between roles during the fight : « omg now my summon needs to deal some fat damage, here we go. » and next turn « wait, karen and bob are in trouble, i should switch my summon to the tank mode to lock my enemies and keep them from reaching them… ».

This kind of « job » will need you to have chosen passives that give somewhat generic bonuses to your summon. Being versatile is costly so you won’t be as efficient as if you were specializing in only one of the roles.


We hear what you say about the « Healing » capabilities which is why we’ll probably make some passive about it, to keep the Healing Masque alive.

The community noticed that masks wouldn’t give a deep enough gameplay to the Masqueraider. It’s an approach that we like and we are going to work so that each mask truly defines a Masqueraider role and gameplay for this rework.

There’s also been a suggestion going on about increasing the number of available masks, but it would be a substantial amount of work. We’ll think of a way to add new mask visuals without having to duplicate every idle/walk/spell animation, but we can’t promise anything at the moment.

To tell you the truth, we don’t have a lot to say about Masque because it shouldn’t change a lot. We hope you will keep on giving feedback on what you think would be great for this class.

Anyway, thanks a lot for your feedback, it was a great live and I hope to be seeing you soon to discuss more about the classes in Wakfu.

See message in context
Reactions 194
Score : 282

Seems they will nerf these classes.

11 -3
Score : 403

It looks that way because these are the top classes in dungeons.
Which is why I would've preferred if they balanced the BOTTOM classes first. This would have a more positive effect on the community and how the community view changes to feca/xelor/osa (the best of the best).

0 -3
Score : 1833

light stasis lmao where are all those people whinging about removing of stasis resist - hurry before it's too late xD

8 -1
Score : 9341


13 -8
Score : 22


0 0
Score : 774

This is the most polite way of pushing players stop playing those 5 classes for an year.
Second name of nerfing classes.
The team is lack of understanding of what they have made for years.
It is super hard to do dungeons without core classes like Feca.
Now team Wakfu shows a plan of removing all must-have spells for current dungeon mechanisms.
And also, this devlog is full of making fun of players who enjoy ones of those 5 classes.

Other classes will become relatively meta-friendly so they are doomed anyway.
Why? Because the project manager will play them and want to up them someday.

Why these 5 classes? Because the project manager plays them and wants to up them. Any other questions?
(sadida meme)

Team Wakfu needs revamp.

13 -6
Score : 403

This is not constructive at all. But to summarize your post: You're scared you won't be able to do these dungeons.

But the dev said their effectiveness in dungeons will remain the same. It just means they won't be the best in 2-3 different things when other classes are good at nothing. Feca for example is laughably the best at 2 roles, very easily. I'm surprised it took them 5 years to realize this.

4 -8
Score : 1493

Feca downgrade seems a logical choice, its kit was way too big. Xelor and fogger downgrade may give issues (depending on the eventual result) with there being little ranged damage dealers remaining and thus making cra the logical choice again. 

I think the dominance of fogger and xelor came from the fact that they did reliable fast and good damage, something almost every content in game is asking for. Reading upon the changes that will be made to xelor i do not see it fit in the dungeon designs right away (don't make it an ouginak Nr2). Thats maybe something to keep in mind while redesigning these classes, nerfing their core aspect may make a lot of elitist content really hard to do. Now i am not saying elitist content ever was a good design of the game, but the fact is that a lot of items are locked behind these 'performance' walls, and access to them depends on the performance of the in game characters ofcourse. 

Its clear that some of these classes were the meta of this game, but please dont make them underwhelming so that players are forced into playing other characters for the sake of performance. I would have loved to see reworks of classes that have no clear defined role or those who do not fit in the teams with a good performance instead(eca/rogue/hupper/sadi/ouginak/sac(?). 

6 -4
Score : 403

Looks like it's time for them to compromise and nerf some/many of the top dungeons as well. At least in the easy to normal stasis levels (?)

3 -2
Score : 289

I've been waiting for a Xelor rework for actual years. Here's hoping it looks more like the Pandawa rework than the Rogue.

While going to generic Osa summons is disappointing, I also completely understand it.

1 0
Score : 6251

Here comes the nerf hammer again!

6 -2
Score : 2094

As a masqueraider main, I was pretty terrorized when I heard of masq revamp. I enjoy a ton the idea of masq being a versatile boy fitting everywhere and doing several roles at the same time (not perfecting them, ofc). But this turned out interesting. Will comment a few things on this, since survey is very restricted on feedback.

Focus of Revamp
'This class is already interesting. We want to offer it more depth and specialization options. Its impact in fights varies between playing on your own, with three or six characters. We could revise its competitiveness upward in groups of six characters if necessary, but the problem is above all that the Masqueraider doesn't have many viable specialization options.'
So from what I see, the revamp is aimed on specializing masq? I hope that by offering depth and specialization you don't kill current options that makes the class so interesting. Being a schizophrenic jack of all trades that runs around is what makes masqueraider so unique and fun.

Heals to Shields
I dislike heals being taken off since I quite liked it, but the idea of adding shields is quite nice. My only worry is if it will be on par with what was it's heals: pretty hefty. If it is balanced right, there won't be a problem.
And I worry a bit about lore. I don't know how that fits into masqueraider lore since we're throwing needles around (I always said it was ranged accupunture xD).

I like the idea of free masks giving buffs, they sound more instant useful. BUT I dislike completely the idea of them having no lasting buff. The examples of buffs from masks apply only to the first spell used, which sounds pretty lame. Psycho, Classic and Coward currently have a lasting buff that helps your whole turn, along with synergies on spells. I expect synergies to be kept, but will there be any mask lasting buff? The idea is to change masks to give burst effects and enforce mask changing a lot? How does this helps specialization?

Masqs unlocking in the fight? So the masqueraider won't be able to use his masks at will, like if they were in inventory? This seems like a way to block the class powers (and op buffs from masks you are making), which seem more like a bother than of actual meaning. I can see that their buffs are damn good, so I can see the reason of them being locked. But won't it be better to lock the buff away and keep the masks importance in masqueraider spell gameplay? Make the unlock for the buff and not the mask itself.

Another thing is that masks look like they are losing their uniqueness. Ap, mp and armor gain are something many classes can do. Lifesteal on more dmg and less resist (current psycho), dodge mp gain (coward) and critical hits buff (classic) was something very unique to masqueraider and its masks. Won't that kill some of masqueraider's essence?

Lastly on mask topic, will carnival keep existing? It was one of the top support capabilities of mask and one hella fun. I hope it will keep existing since it's very nice and feels a lot like masqueraide soul. In the comics masquemane even gears his whole team with them.

The branches division sounds pretty solid, but you see, masqueraider currently has mobility on all 3 branches (2 on fire, 3 on water and 4 on air). Will that be kept or its mobility will no longer be as awesome? One of the identities of masq is an agile thing that runs around the field unstrained.

Overall Im not as unpleased as I thought I would be. The first ideas are nice but need polishing. As I see with other classes, it feels you are not caring much about class identities and are worriying only about class standartization (making them closer to each other), game balance and killing some of their uniqueness (like foggernaut stasis, masqs unique buffs, osamodas capturable summons). I can see reasons for these changes but some of them look like you only wish to render dev's lifes easier at the cost of some fun features of the game that make it so unique and refreshing.

Anyhow, those were my thoughts on masqueraider! I hope to hear more of it

5 0
Score : 1833

It is not wise movement on character balancing. in aspect of public sentiment
let me get to straight this Devblog
There are certain nerf of 3 characters which is currently in meta and concept shifting of 2class.

Guess how people would feel and act. 
A.Players who have those 3 meta characters would not be happy due to nerf.
B. Players who have bad character would not be happy because it is them who were looking foward to get revamp mostly.
C. players with osa, fogger, feca would have to rebuild their whole gear set, which is very hard and unpleasant because of enchantment. i think we all do agree enchantment made making new build very hard process. 
D. Players with osa and mask, i don't know masq, but osamodas players would not certainly be happy.

Most of people can not be happy whether their characters are inside of new revamps or not. You think people don't have ability to notice your bigger picture. But it seems like that it is you who don't like to explain us what is your bigger picture of this game and keep telling us shut up and follow your great lead. 

14 -2
Score : 403

We've been through this same dance every time they decide to balance classes. They always go for the "meta" classes first (iop, cra, eni, xelor, osa, feca). The same original few. By the time they get to the bottom classes their priorities have changed....their dev team has changed....they don't have enough time to revamp the lower classes or the dungeon design has changed so they need to rebalance iop, cra, osa, feca again.

They've done this mistake of ignoring the bottom classes many times before. Wakfu is a very old game, we've seen this.

This is not an attack on the current devs. I see their intentions, they want to use these 5 classes as the basis for the bottom ones, but the result and effect on the community is "nerf nerf nerf" since they're the top classes currently. And it doesn't address what the community feels should be the focus: the bottom classes.

This is a classic design philosophy conflict. Devs want to fix the core problem with the roles/specialization system of the game; which takes many years to fix. The community is dying and would like the bottom classes to actually be VIABLE options, but this is hard for the devs since they see the lower classes as alternative options, instead of core classes as well.

4 -3
Score : 5930

We will hope it become better please...

1 -2
Score : 548

Clearly u can make Xelor and Fogg unplayable what will force ppl to change class. In result this can be end again people start playing for example Elio and Cra only so u will nerf them too... so next what? Anyway I see many ppl than dont play Fogg Xelor everywhere, for example me, I like to run dormor with sac/sram main dd and Xelor only to take off dogs since it's my only range char made. Xelor change can be good but dont make those changes to fogg. Range char with cc bonuses and light dmg, u are making weaker version of Hupper and Hupper mostly is usable for 1 dung, Nogord

3 -2
Score : 403

My favorite devs are the Final Fantasy XIV devs; their class design philosophy focuses on bringing the bottom classes up. The role specialization design changes naturally at the same time that they revamp/redesign the lower classes. An example of this is the recent redesign to Machinist and Summoner.

Sometimes mmo devs have to consider Time And Community sentiment into account when redesigning classes. Core role/specialization design will take a lot of time and this clashes with the expectations of a community that has waited for game design changes for many many many years now.

I can tell you they've revamped xelor and osa at least 3 or 4 times already. The mistrust is there.

5 -2
Score : 734

Small suggestion: Include the proposed class changes in the class-specific forum threads for easier reference so people don't have to keep switching tabs if they need/want to re-read the changes.

1 0
Score : 580

I can't help it but feel sceptical and worried, both about feca and fogger classes (and really sorry for masq)..
From what it sounds the feca class is going to be more versatile, but from what it reads it looks like even more restrictions and boredom. Sacrier can do all that feca does much better while doing huge dmg (exc 1 turn immunity and AP glyph ofc). Feca is already some of the boring-sidekick classes (along with eni) that everybody has for buffs and that 1 turn of immunity and not as their main character. I don't even know what to think about these changes especially since it's worded so vaguely and sugarcoated (it still feels like a wave of nerfs disguised as "rebalance").
If that'd mean that feca class is slowly getting reversed back to its pre-revamp state, I'd embrace it wholeheartedly, but it doesn't seem so.

1 0
Score : 734

"The project manager plays them and wants to up them."

Idk about you, but I read that more as a slap in the face of "psh we don't care about you, we're just doing what we think is right" instead of the light-handed joke that was intended. Several parts of this sound like manager speak that is meant to sound like a lot of good/important/necessary things are happening...

4 -1
Score : 403

My own thoughts are simple: Are the bottom classes not core classes as well? You can revamp Sadida while revamping the summoner archetype; instead of Osa who's currently an effective class in dungeons.

1 -1
Score : 1925

"Osa who's currently an effective class in dungeons." ?????????????

Osa is trash right now. Their damage is subpar to every damage dealer in the game every since they nerfed badgerroxor. Their buffs/healing is subpar to every support class out there as well. Your better off taking any class other than osa to fill your team because its going to do what your want your osa to do but better. 

3 -3
Score : 227

On the current state of the game 
fogger and hupper take on different ways to deal dmg . fogger with the constant reliable dmg and way faster .hupper with more dmg potential yet less range and versatily than fogger . with these changes to fogger it became closer to ever to hupper .and it may bring the question of . Will one of them outclass the other . i cannot say that yet but i have my concerns . Both with light dmg and elemental mastery management skills .i think fogger will only have higher range if what this happens  .also i dont think turning fogger into a burst dmg class is a good idea cause even with higher dmg those kind of playstyles have been proven not to be that effective . But well thats all i had to say hope u take these into account

3 -3
Score : 95

You're replacing stasis with light? No thank you! Having Huppermages with light spells and Foggernuats with stasis spells is part of what makes them unique! But I can see that it might be a good idea to revamp the stasis spells to fit in with the elemental resistances system.

1 0
Score : 9669

Light isnt unique to huppermage, its just glorified "chromatic damage", which is why they removed the naming of chromatic damage and replaced it all under the term "light"

0 -1
Score : 12029
11 -1
Score : 227
1 -4
Score : 484

uh well, rip for thoose ppl give everything for the new reroll system and need to build up a new gear so

17 -1
Score : 1126

Feca has been a long time coming. It's been so ridiculously strong that it's altered the game to develop around -it-.

Xelor is the dial. Yes, it has a wide range of somewhat arbitrary mechanics, that could use smoothing out, but the dial is the whole point.

I only play Osa to be a pokemon master. That's the biggest draw of the class. If you're gonna change the whole point, at least provide us a free class change.

1 -2
Respond to this thread