Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

What the hell is going on with the anti holy trinity lately

When I read they were going to release an elder scroll online, I thought it was a great idea...

 

Now, reading a bit on the left and right, I came to learn that the game WON'T have an aggro system. Seriously, after GW2 failfest I don't understand why company still try to go that way. Even in GW2 high end players were recreating a holy trinity by using game gimmicks, which was far from being fun let me add.

 

Being a tank in every game that I play (single player too when I can...), this is simply a big fun killer for me. The holy trinity is nothing but efficient tactic.

 

I don't know, make the game not REQUIRE holy trinity, why not give it a try... But simply DENYING this aspect by not having aggro system at all is just wrong from my point of view.

 

I will probably try the game nonetheless, but my hopes for this game went from high to underground with this.

 

Sources:

 

http://www.elderscrollsguides.com/the-elder-scrolls-online-leaked-info-so-far/

http://www.rpgamer.com/news/Q4-2012/102212a.html

«134567

Comments

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    From what I understand TESO while it has healers doesn't have traditional tanks or any threat mechanics
  • KheldenKhelden QuPosts: 20Member
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    From what I understand TESO while it has healers doesn't have traditional tanks or any threat mechanics

    That's my understanding too considering they said someone could play a sneaky healer...

     

    But no threat mechanic to go with is a shame.

  • ghstwolfghstwolf hampstead, NHPosts: 386Member
    Originally posted by Khelden

    Being a tank in every game that I play (single player too when I can...), this is simply a big fun killer for me. The holy trinity is nothing but efficient tactic.

     I don't know, make the game not REQUIRE holy trinity, why not give it a try... But simply DENYING this aspect by not having aggro system at all is just wrong from my point of view.

     

     

    Aggro systems are lazy hold overs from the past.  The trinity doesn't require an aggro system, and IMO would be much more fun without it.  Then again I am in favor of virtually any change that eliminates the DDR feel of group PvE.

    "Doing it right" would be a ton more work.  You'd need positional blocking, an AI with a threat vs proximity metric and release/retarget subroutine, plus a few other considerations (friendly fire for example).  Sadly though, even if it were to be executed perfectly, the game would fail.  That leap in complexity would alienate too many players that want (need is probably the better word) the static encounter to be "epic".

  • muffins89muffins89 Yakima, WAPosts: 1,306Member Uncommon
    where the source on the "no threat mechanic" i've not heard  anything like that.

    I think the prostitute mod corrupted your game files man. -elhefen

  • ZyzraZyzra Madison, WIPosts: 354Member
    Anti-Holy Trinity?  Probably just some people who are likely to get coal in their stocking.
  • bansanbansan blah city, MOPosts: 367Member
    *snip* Sadly though, even if it were to be executed perfectly, the game would fail.  That leap in complexity would alienate too many players that want (need is probably the better word) the static encounter to be "epic".

    I don't know about failing, but you need go no further than GW2 to see this play out.  You get some really good players that work togother and do the content with w/e mix of classes is available.

    Then you have people, like the OP, who can't hack it outside the trinity and think everything else sucks.

  • KheldenKhelden QuPosts: 20Member
    Originally posted by ghstwolf
    Originally posted by Khelden

    Being a tank in every game that I play (single player too when I can...), this is simply a big fun killer for me. The holy trinity is nothing but efficient tactic.

     I don't know, make the game not REQUIRE holy trinity, why not give it a try... But simply DENYING this aspect by not having aggro system at all is just wrong from my point of view.

     

     

    Aggro systems are lazy hold overs from the past.  The trinity doesn't require an aggro system, and IMO would be much more fun without it.  Then again I am in favor of virtually any change that eliminates the DDR feel of group PvE.

    "Doing it right" would be a ton more work.  You'd need positional blocking, an AI with a threat vs proximity metric and release/retarget subroutine, plus a few other considerations (friendly fire for example).  Sadly though, even if it were to be executed perfectly, the game would fail.  That leap in complexity would alienate too many players that want (need is probably the better word) the static encounter to be "epic".

    I disagree, I think aggro system is something which adds a lot to the game, whatever the way it is done. I wouldn't mind playing in an environment with temporary threat management, where the monster can pretty much attack randomly but where there are a few taunts to manage the situation. For example, during a special phase or to save an ally. I would even enjoy it.

     

    But as it seems right now, after the huge fail of GW2 system where everybody was on his own,  TESO is going for the Healer is responsible for everybody.

     

    Let's not forget, also, that unless the sword/mace and shield warrior deals as much damage as a dual-wield or two-handed warrior, the fact that there is no threat will most likely make him unwanted for high end groups where efficiency matters. 

     

    There are a lot of stuff to be improved in the MMO industry, but I'm fairly sure that harming the possibility of playing the role we want isn't something great.

  • VorthanionVorthanion Laguna Vista, TXPosts: 2,119Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    From what I understand TESO while it has healers doesn't have traditional tanks or any threat mechanics

    If that's true, the healers better be able to take care of themselves as well as the group or no one is going to play the healing pin cushion.  The problem I have with games like GW2 is that the combat mechanic is based around death and ressurecting rather than focusing on survival.  All of the hard encounters are designed specifically to kill people and success is determined more on attentive rezzing than anything else.

    image
  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    I think no threat is a good thing

    You can tank in otherways, worked out ok with gw1 and war.
  • WizardryWizardry Ontario, CanadaPosts: 8,444Member Uncommon

    Every argument people use,is still possible inside the Trinity.

    IMO it is simply a case of lazy or cheap developers.

    I can use one example and it comes form the develoepr that puts the most effort into their design,Square.

    The sub class system,gives you the ability to be versatile and acheive anything all on the same player,no need for wasting time on alts.Yo uwant some dps with healing,you go it.You don't liek trinity,no one is saying inside of FFXI design that you have to use it.

    The bottom line is Hate/Aggro/Trinity are all about organized game play.Anything taking those away is creating a sloppy game design.At least FFXI gives you the choice,the anti Trinity games give you no choice,just grab a class and go in guns a blazing,whoever gets hate get it,nothing organized.Whgo is healing?We don't know,just go in and fight,we will figure it out as we fight.Oh wait we can kill in 3 hits no need for healing,just grab the most dps you can muster.

    Like i said if you want that sloppy game play,you can still do it inside the trinity design.using the argument i noticed,unless you can't hack the challenge?

    You are not going to get a more Trinity based game than FFXI but if you are smart and understand your class,Almost anything can make up a group.Geesh i remember befriending a black mage who asked me to team up. Ithought no way we die fast.He was smart he lined up far opposite side and we bounced hate back n forth,the mob never got close enough to hit us.If we did get hit,it was only once then the mob darted for the other guy.Yo uca ngo blm/ninja for shadows and still take many hits with no damage,the key is game design and versatility,GOOD games have it.


    Samoan Diamond

  • ZyzraZyzra Madison, WIPosts: 354Member
    Originally posted by Wizardry

    Every argument people use,is still possible inside the Trinity.

    IMO it is simply a case of lazy or cheap developers.

    I can use one example and it comes form the develoepr that puts the most effort into their design,Square.

    The sub class system,gives you the ability to be versatile and acheive anything all on the same player,no need for wasting time on alts.Yo uwant some dps with healing,you go it.You don't liek trinity,no one is saying inside of FFXI design that you have to use it.

    The bottom line is Hate/Aggro/Trinity are all about organized game play.Anything taking those away is creating a sloppy game design.At least FFXI gives you the choice,the anti Trinity games give you no choice,just grab a class and go in guns a blazing,whoever gets hate get it,nothing organized.Whgo is healing?We don't know,just go in and fight,we will figure it out as we fight.Oh wait we can kill in 3 hits no need for healing,just grab the most dps you can muster.

    Like i said if you want that sloppy game play,you can still do it inside the trinity design.using the argument i noticed,unless you can't hack the challenge?

    You are not going to get a more Trinity based game than FFXI but if you are smart and understand your class,Almost anything can make up a group.Geesh i remember befriending a black mage who asked me to team up. Ithought no way we die fast.He was smart he lined up far opposite side and we bounced hate back n forth,the mob never got close enough to hit us.If we did get hit,it was only once then the mob darted for the other guy.Yo uca ngo blm/ninja for shadows and still take many hits with no damage,the key is game design and versatility,GOOD games have it.

    Darn A Tale In The Desert, with its lack of a trinity and obviously sloppy game design.  They must have lazy and cheap developers.

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,666Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Khelden

    When I read they were going to release an elder scroll online, I thought it was a great idea...

    Now, reading a bit on the left and right, I came to learn that the game WON'T have an aggro system. Seriously, after GW2 failfest I don't understand why company still try to go that way. Even in GW2 high end players were recreating a holy trinity by using game gimmicks, which was far from being fun let me add.

    Being a tank in every game that I play (single player too when I can...), this is simply a big fun killer for me. The holy trinity is nothing but efficient tactic.

    I don't know, make the game not REQUIRE holy trinity, why not give it a try... But simply DENYING this aspect by not having aggro system at all is just wrong from my point of view.

    I will probably try the game nonetheless, but my hopes for this game went from high to underground with this.

    Doing something different doesn't mean they are "anti" your favored system. It just means they are doing something different.

    On another note, the trinity/aggro design is "efficient tactic" in MMOs with no CD, strict roles and arranged combat with incredibly stupid opponents. The more the game deviates from the formula the less efficient the trinity is.

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • tollboothtollbooth grants pass, ORPosts: 298Member

    GW2 didn't get rid of the trinity.. all they did was make the current person getting hit the tank, and everyone the healer after that person goes into the down state.

    Instead of taking a sidestep in mechanics and trying something new they took a step backwards into a land that no game bothered implementing before because you could see it was fail before you even tried.

  • bcbullybcbully Westland, MIPosts: 8,277Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Zyzra
    Anti-Holy Trinity?  Probably just some people who are likely to get coal in their stocking.

    I would like to see the link too.  It would be slightly disappointing

  • SirFubarSirFubar SeoulPosts: 397Member
    Originally posted by Vorthanion
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    From what I understand TESO while it has healers doesn't have traditional tanks or any threat mechanics

    If that's true, the healers better be able to take care of themselves as well as the group or no one is going to play the healing pin cushion.  The problem I have with games like GW2 is that the combat mechanic is based around death and ressurecting rather than focusing on survival.  All of the hard encounters are designed specifically to kill people and success is determined more on attentive rezzing than anything else.

    What? GW2 combat mechanic based around death and res?? If you're success is determined more on attentive rezzing than anything else, you obviously don't know how to play or just don't understand the mechanics of the game well. In a good group, its completely possible to do every single dungeons without having to rez anyone 1 single time if you know what you're doing. And some can be really challenging before you figure them out.

  • FromHellFromHell NY, NYPosts: 1,311Member

    oh god please no. The age of GW2 clones is coming upon us.

    That must be what the Mayans have predicted. :(

    Secrets of Dragon?s Spine Trailer.. ! :D
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwT9cFVQCMw

    Best MMOs ever played: Ultima, EvE, SW Galaxies, Age of Conan, The Secret World
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2X_SbZCHpc&t=21s
    .


    .
    The Return of ELITE !
    image

  • XAPKenXAPKen Northwest, INPosts: 4,918Member Uncommon
    I haven't heard about the aggro system (or lack of) in TESO.

    Ken Fisher - Semi retired old fart Network Administrator, now turned Amateur Game Developer.  I don't Forum PVP.  If you feel I've attacked you, it was probably by accident.  Realm Lords 2 on MMORPG.com
  • KhinRuniteKhinRunite ManilaPosts: 879Member
    Originally posted by SirFubar
    Originally posted by Vorthanion
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    From what I understand TESO while it has healers doesn't have traditional tanks or any threat mechanics

    If that's true, the healers better be able to take care of themselves as well as the group or no one is going to play the healing pin cushion.  The problem I have with games like GW2 is that the combat mechanic is based around death and ressurecting rather than focusing on survival.  All of the hard encounters are designed specifically to kill people and success is determined more on attentive rezzing than anything else.

    What? GW2 combat mechanic based around death and res?? If you're success is determined more on attentive rezzing than anything else, you obviously don't know how to play or just don't understand the mechanics of the game well. In a good group, its completely possible to do every single dungeons without having to rez anyone 1 single time if you know what you're doing. And some can be really challenging before you figure them out.

    Yeah it's pretty obvious that the game's mechanics (still) hasn't sunk in yet for some people. The mere fact that others can conquer what they can't attests to that, but they prefer to blame it on the game.

    I don't know what the frack is this talk about GW2's combat mega-failing, but I really prefer not being rejected in a group because I can't do anything else aside from DPSing, where in any MMO is the most abundant archetype. Maybe because I always pick the DPS class, and this game gives me the ability to tank and heal all at the same time. Natural tanks and healers may be feeling sore because they're no longer that special in GW2, and by extension in this game.

  • KheldenKhelden QuPosts: 20Member
    Originally posted by bcbully
    Originally posted by Zyzra
    Anti-Holy Trinity?  Probably just some people who are likely to get coal in their stocking.

    I would like to see the link too.  It would be slightly disappointing

    http://www.elderscrollsguides.com/the-elder-scrolls-online-leaked-info-so-far/

    http://www.rpgamer.com/news/Q4-2012/102212a.html

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    You don't need threat to tank. You can tank through crowd control, collision detection, blocking and intercepting for team mates etc..
  • ghstwolfghstwolf hampstead, NHPosts: 386Member
    Originally posted by Khelden

    Let's not forget, also, that unless the sword/mace and shield warrior deals as much damage as a dual-wield or two-handed warrior, the fact that there is no threat will most likely make him unwanted for high end groups where efficiency matters. 

     

    There are a lot of stuff to be improved in the MMO industry, but I'm fairly sure that harming the possibility of playing the role we want isn't something great.

    Not at all, high survivability (tank) will still be a great asset for any group with the brains to utilize chokepoints.  Tank type characters would likely have a higher resistance (not immune) to friendly fire and knock backs than other configurations.  The whole point of something like this is to get away from efficiency as a function of dps/tps/hps and move it to what should matter success.

    Personally I've never viewed the "role" as something so simple as a trinity slot.  Maybe it's why I prefer hybrid classes and dual combat roles (OT/OH or similar), to me playing meatshield, healbot or DPS exclusively is boring.  I love switching gears fight to fight or even mid fight, having to correctly pick that spot to transition and the extra level of teamwork required to pull it off is more memorable and exciting to me. 

  • GravargGravarg Harker Heights, TXPosts: 3,332Member Uncommon

    As an avid tanker, I've seen this coming for a long time.  I'm one of the few that actually loves, and I mean LOVES tanking.  You're the backbone of any good group.  If you go down, so does the rest of the group.  At least with healers, you usually have some dps class that can take over, or you can outright tank the final few % without heals...but healer shouldn't ever die if you're a good tank hehe (unless they're stupid and get caught in AoEs, durdur duuur).

     

    I like the popularity that comes with being the tank.  My guild knows my name.  They know they can call on me for great tanking deeds.  I'm not some random "replace with any millions of other" DPSers.  I'm not some healer that doesn't have to do thier job because the raid has plenty of others to pick up their slack.  I'm the tank, the one (or two) and only tank!  I take the hits, and have people pay royalties for my repair bill.  I laugh at the most fearsome bosses, and dance on thier corpses after they fail to vanquish me!  I am the master of knowledge, and I know every raid, every boss, where to position the fight, how to keep my allies alive without healing. I AM TANK!

     

     

    Just my 2 pennies :)

  • bcbullybcbully Westland, MIPosts: 8,277Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    You don't need threat to tank. You can tank through crowd control, collision detection, blocking and intercepting for team mates etc..

    Good point. I'd like to see something like this, but could you imagine the qq from bad pvprs? I can here them now, "OMG THIS PVP SUCKS!" image

  • WraithoneWraithone Salt Lake City, UTPosts: 3,593Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by FromHell

    oh god please no. The age of GW2 clones is coming upon us.

    That must be what the Mayans have predicted. :(

    Exactly. It is the very End of Days... ^^  I only managed to get to level 60(warrior) in GW2, before I finally said to hell with it.  Its just not my type of game. But some people obviously like it.  I'm going to wait until TESO launches, and give it a try to see how it plays. 

  • KheldenKhelden QuPosts: 20Member
    Originally posted by ghstwolf
    Originally posted by Khelden

    Let's not forget, also, that unless the sword/mace and shield warrior deals as much damage as a dual-wield or two-handed warrior, the fact that there is no threat will most likely make him unwanted for high end groups where efficiency matters. 

     

    There are a lot of stuff to be improved in the MMO industry, but I'm fairly sure that harming the possibility of playing the role we want isn't something great.

    Not at all, high survivability (tank) will still be a great asset for any group with the brains to utilize chokepoints.  Tank type characters would likely have a higher resistance (not immune) to friendly fire and knock backs than other configurations.  The whole point of something like this is to get away from efficiency as a function of dps/tps/hps and move it to what should matter success.

    Personally I've never viewed the "role" as something so simple as a trinity slot.  Maybe it's why I prefer hybrid classes and dual combat roles (OT/OH or similar), to me playing meatshield, healbot or DPS exclusively is boring.  I love switching gears fight to fight or even mid fight, having to correctly pick that spot to transition and the extra level of teamwork required to pull it off is more memorable and exciting to me. 

    Having a high survivability is nothing close of being a justification for bringing someone with lower DPS. Take for example Aion when Balaura was released, where Templar were tanking the discovery mode of dungeons then the Gladiators were slowly taking the main tanking spot. Glads were doing more DPS while tanking than Templars and so were able to make the runs faster. (I was playing both.)

     

    If a DPS gets on par with a tank, the tank will be left out in any high end group where efficiency is important.

«134567
Sign In or Register to comment.