I am tired of people raging about non-trinity just because ArenaNet are bad designers.
All they have to do to make non-DPS teams viable is make SOMETHING OTHER THAN DPS WORTH USING.
Well there you go.. I have posted on this and even made a thread on it long ago.. I even addressed this years ago on here and on the WoW forums as to how to deal with role based classes and non.. Lets use GW2 as my example since it's a recent popular action based game I'm familiar with..
You have 6 people grouped up looking for some action.. They are old school and are comfortable playing with roles.. So: 1 man is a warrior plate class and he is wielding a broad sword and shield.. Because of this weapons line up, his first 5 hot keys are all "tanking" themed.. His swings and shield bashes will cause single and AOE threat.. Another player the priest is carrying a dagger and tome.. Her first 5 hot keys are all healing theme from single to multi target.. You might even have other classes such as Necro's using a weapon line that promotes DoTing and self/pet heals.. You definitely could have druids that use a weapons line that allows them to snare, root and dot mobs giving them the ability to kite.. or Enchanters that charm and mez..
But back to my example.. Lets assume your group changes to a non trinity (role) playing group like GW2 is today.. The plate warrior swaps out his broad sword and shield for a two-handed sword.. He loses his taunting abilities and becomes mainly dps.. The priest then swaps out her weapons for a mace and shield, giving her hot keys a dps theme and minimal heals.. What baffles me is why EQN or GW2, both promoting the weapons swap ability that dictates "WHAT" skills and abilities you have, to satisfy both trinity and non-trinity type of role play.. Let the players and group decide HOW they wish to play..
I learned alot from GW2, but not in a good way. I learned its a zergfest compared to tactical use of classes. I learned that Tanks and Healers are awesome, and would not wanne live without them in my games. I learned that GW2 can never change the way this game is played, unless they do a total overhaul and add healer and tank. I learned that you can spot skilled players in traditional mmo's much more then in GW2. I learned that you can make bosses much more advanced and difficult / challaging then in mmo's were you dont have tanks and healers. And most importandly, i learned i have alot more fun playing a healer or tank then a dps. GW2 and EQN will almost have idantical combat, we have already seen this on the presentation. And i cant stress enough how disapointed i am with a next gen mmo using this kind of system Pfew can we get on teamspeak next time ?
A post from someone who gets it.
Nah, that's a post from someone who only gets it to a certain degree.
Everyone points to the fact that there are no roles in GW2 as the reason why things aren't organised, when the real reason is that some of the stuff is just badly designed and provide no reason to have roles. There are some amazingly, well designed bosses and dungeons in GW2 that require teamwork and tactics but obviously those are overlooked just to make the point that GW2 needs the trinity in order for it to feel less like it's piss easy, like that would help in any way shape or form.
The fact of the matter is, dungeons, bosses, mobs, all need to be well designed in order to force the players into working together. It doesn't matter whether you have a trinity or not, if your encounter isn't designed to foster teamwork, it will just be faceroll and that's a fact. Mothanos may believe that you need a Guardian and a Warrior to finish content in GW2, but as a Guardian myself, I know for a fact that you do not need this class to finish content. Only elitists who follow the crowd believe such fallacy. I personally have finished content with 4 Rangers and only me as the Guardian and how did we do it? I told all of them to run specific skills that would help the group survive. It also helps if your team actually listens.
Anyway, I think it's silly to believe that the trinity provides anything other than a small semblance of organization when the true test of teamwork comes from the encounter itself. Mothanos himself gave a good example of this with the description of his WoW raiding days.
I don't play themepark games, and I don't feel that way.
I feel like the combat will be bad because I understand how AI works, being a computer programmer. I also understand what made games good in the past, and its irrelevant to dungeons or raids, it was the mechanics that promoted player interdependence. Both the ability to switch classes on the fly, multi-class AND the removal of necessary roles in combat just does not make for intelligent combat. They already effectively removed the need for any player interdependence via class specific abilities by allowing players to switch and combine abilities, but going further and dumbing down combat (I don't care how much "emergent AI" there is) is just taking it too far. A combat system that allows players to succeed without any necessary roles will ALWAYS result in playing cat and mouse, kiting and button mashing dps. The more I think about it the more it becomes obvious that the whole system was designed to be viable on a handheld controller (Playstation 4 anyone?). Come on, a maximum of 4 class abilities? Get real.
Oh, Dullahan, keep beating that tired old drum. As I've posted on a couple of occasions, your fictitious assertions don't hold up under scrutiny. You should watch the Panels again. Then, watch them one more time and rinse and repeat until you understand what the Dev's have said. Just for you, I'm going to supply a link you should pay close attention to. Why? I will bullet the counter-points:
Multi-classing is an option
Roles are still there and are just as viable
Mob AI has been kicked up a hundred notches, so you have to play smarter
The removal of the tank aggro system is due to the smarter AI
Player interdependence is huge and necessary
If you mindlessly button mash you will die. Play smarter, because the mobs definitely will
Ref: Class Panel part 2 see 13:30 and 19:18 (although the whole Panel is filled with great info)
Now, I understand that you won't really watch that. However, for the people that haven't seen the panels and who might believe your misinformation, I've supplied factual data.
Watched and rewatched.
Still see their hatred of any mechanics that might even potentially ostracize a player in any way. That means levels, that means "necessary roles" (which they specifically said they would NEVER have). Sorry you don't see it. Not going to go back through and provide you with quotes, because its obvious your mind is made up to "keep the faith" in SOE.
I, on the other hand, will not be defending them regardless of how many innovative features they add to the list. By all means though, continue to "fight the good fight." You would be a good PR guy for SOE; You down play all the most important points and highlight possible interpretations of vague statements remarkably well. Maybe you should submit an app.
sorry.. but the more you post.. the less believable you are... in your other post.. you said there are 4 class abilities.. that isn't true at all
there are 8.. four optional abilities based on a combination of wpn/class. each wpn does different things for each class...Then there are 4 pure class abilities.. based on what class you select. Building on that they give you the option of not using your class abilities and introducing 4 other class abilities. being able to mix abilities doesn't ruin interdependence.. The inability to adapt and think ruins group combat. cc abilities are much more believable than traditional taunt abilities. so if a tank has cc abilities that allow him to control the pace of the fight.. i don't see why he would no longer be a tank. as long as he can perform the basic protection of other party members function... he is still a tank. he may not be able to protect them 100%.. but protecting someone 50-70% is much better than not at all.
Look fella, if you're going to correct people, at least get your facts straight.
You say I'm wrong about there being 4 class abilities, then say there are 4 class abilities. I know there are weapon abilities also, but weapon abilities and class abilities are different. You can tell, because weapons are different than classes. Different letters, different words, different definitions.
Tanks in EQ didn't protect anyone 100%. Not even close. Hardly a fight went by where mobs didn't stray at some point, even if the tank was chain casting aggro spells, or procing agro weapons with max dex. There were so many intricate variables involved in combat and threat management in EQ1, it would make most of you children of Azeroth blow a gasket.
Originally posted by itchmon shouldnt we at least see a minute or two of game play before we say the game has unresolved issues? I'm not saying people cant theorycraft (or theoryquest) but lets not bury the poor game even before we have seen actual gameplay footage.
Not really. It's a bit like asking to see a match lit to see that it burns. We know how this plays out, it's been done before.
Not really, thats just like saying every hamburger is the same.. cause its a hamburger.
Well they are.
A burger made from ham.
not even worth a response..
Ohh god, that was hilarious, its signature worthy I think , way to give the argument away in a single sentence.
As people have said before we dont know enough about this game to identify major issues other than speculating about it.
They said in the panel very clearly, THERE WILL BE Support/tanks, they just don't want to force you to have this claass for grouping or that class.
They are talking about something like Vindictus it seems. All classes are basically DPS, and the mob attacks everyone and you have no aggro system.
But tanks block and caster double dodge and DPS might slip under the mob.
So yes, you can say.........there are still tanks...........but that's a joke also, they don't actually tank....they just shield block.
Vindictus is basically an AE aggro ping pong game.
It's fun for a bit, but it has no community because you don't need a healer...you don't need a tank...you don't depend on anyone.
Also these actions systems have no support rolls, no CC, no pulling. They're just DPS fests. And they are all DPS fests, I have not seen an exception yet.
I don't play themepark games, and I don't feel that way.
I feel like the combat will be bad because I understand how AI works, being a computer programmer. I also understand what made games good in the past, and its irrelevant to dungeons or raids, it was the mechanics that promoted player interdependence. Both the ability to switch classes on the fly, multi-class AND the removal of necessary roles in combat just does not make for intelligent combat. They already effectively removed the need for any player interdependence via class specific abilities by allowing players to switch and combine abilities, but going further and dumbing down combat (I don't care how much "emergent AI" there is) is just taking it too far. A combat system that allows players to succeed without any necessary roles will ALWAYS result in playing cat and mouse, kiting and button mashing dps. The more I think about it the more it becomes obvious that the whole system was designed to be viable on a handheld controller (Playstation 4 anyone?). Come on, a maximum of 4 class abilities? Get real.
Oh, Dullahan, keep beating that tired old drum. As I've posted on a couple of occasions, your fictitious assertions don't hold up under scrutiny. You should watch the Panels again. Then, watch them one more time and rinse and repeat until you understand what the Dev's have said. Just for you, I'm going to supply a link you should pay close attention to. Why? I will bullet the counter-points:
Multi-classing is an option
Roles are still there and are just as viable
Mob AI has been kicked up a hundred notches, so you have to play smarter
The removal of the tank aggro system is due to the smarter AI
Player interdependence is huge and necessary
If you mindlessly button mash you will die. Play smarter, because the mobs definitely will
Ref: Class Panel part 2 see 13:30 and 19:18 (although the whole Panel is filled with great info)
Now, I understand that you won't really watch that. However, for the people that haven't seen the panels and who might believe your misinformation, I've supplied factual data.
Watched and rewatched.
Still see their hatred of any mechanics that might even potentially ostracize a player in any way. That means levels, that means "necessary roles" (which they specifically said they would NEVER have). Sorry you don't see it. Not going to go back through and provide you with quotes, because its obvious your mind is made up to "keep the faith" in SOE.
I, on the other hand, will not be defending them regardless of how many innovative features they add to the list. By all means though, continue to "fight the good fight." You would be a good PR guy for SOE; You down play all the most important points and highlight possible interpretations of vague statements remarkably well. Maybe you should submit an app.
sorry.. but the more you post.. the less believable you are... in your other post.. you said there are 4 class abilities.. that isn't true at all
there are 8.. four optional abilities based on a combination of wpn/class. each wpn does different things for each class...Then there are 4 pure class abilities.. based on what class you select. Building on that they give you the option of not using your class abilities and introducing 4 other class abilities. being able to mix abilities doesn't ruin interdependence.. The inability to adapt and think ruins group combat. cc abilities are much more believable than traditional taunt abilities. so if a tank has cc abilities that allow him to control the pace of the fight.. i don't see why he would no longer be a tank. as long as he can perform the basic protection of other party members function... he is still a tank. he may not be able to protect them 100%.. but protecting someone 50-70% is much better than not at all.
Look fella, if you're going to correct people, at least get your facts straight.
You say I'm wrong about there being 4 class abilities, then say there are 4 class abilities. I know there are weapon abilities also, but weapon abilities and class abilities are different. You can tell, because weapons are different than classes. Different letters, different words, different definitions.
Tanks in EQ didn't protect anyone 100%. Not even close. Hardly a fight went by where mobs didn't stray at some point, even if the tank was chain casting aggro spells, or procing agro weapons with max dex. There were so many intricate variables involved in combat and threat management in EQ1, it would make most of you children of Azeroth blow a gasket.
I am correct.. maybe i wasn't clear.. the point is that wpn abilities ARE class abilities. Just as in guild wars the wpn has different effects based on what class you are. For example... even if a cleric uses a mace/ shield or sword/shield that doesn't mean it would then be primarily be dps.. it could have 2 wpn heal skills with the wpn skill set. They didn't really go into how it works.. but it would be logical to say that if the class is called a cleric most of its abilities.. even if they are on the wpn.. will still be some type of healing or support skill.. every wpn does different things for different classes.. therefore they qualify as class skills... if they did the same thing for every class they would be wpn skills.. which is why i called them wpn/class abilities.. because the abilites are dependent on both what class you are and what wpn you are using.
edit... but then again your point may have been that the 4 wpn/class abilities are not able to be changed and that would almost make my posts in response to urs moot. other than the fact that the ability pool would be changed to 8 and not 4..two set of 4 abilities based on ur equiped wpn/class. being disappointed in the number of abilities is understandable... but as some have posted before me... as long as the abilities are interesting and useful.... 8 abilities are enough.
Comments
Well there you go.. I have posted on this and even made a thread on it long ago.. I even addressed this years ago on here and on the WoW forums as to how to deal with role based classes and non.. Lets use GW2 as my example since it's a recent popular action based game I'm familiar with..
You have 6 people grouped up looking for some action.. They are old school and are comfortable playing with roles.. So: 1 man is a warrior plate class and he is wielding a broad sword and shield.. Because of this weapons line up, his first 5 hot keys are all "tanking" themed.. His swings and shield bashes will cause single and AOE threat.. Another player the priest is carrying a dagger and tome.. Her first 5 hot keys are all healing theme from single to multi target.. You might even have other classes such as Necro's using a weapon line that promotes DoTing and self/pet heals.. You definitely could have druids that use a weapons line that allows them to snare, root and dot mobs giving them the ability to kite.. or Enchanters that charm and mez..
But back to my example.. Lets assume your group changes to a non trinity (role) playing group like GW2 is today.. The plate warrior swaps out his broad sword and shield for a two-handed sword.. He loses his taunting abilities and becomes mainly dps.. The priest then swaps out her weapons for a mace and shield, giving her hot keys a dps theme and minimal heals.. What baffles me is why EQN or GW2, both promoting the weapons swap ability that dictates "WHAT" skills and abilities you have, to satisfy both trinity and non-trinity type of role play.. Let the players and group decide HOW they wish to play..
Nah, that's a post from someone who only gets it to a certain degree.
Everyone points to the fact that there are no roles in GW2 as the reason why things aren't organised, when the real reason is that some of the stuff is just badly designed and provide no reason to have roles. There are some amazingly, well designed bosses and dungeons in GW2 that require teamwork and tactics but obviously those are overlooked just to make the point that GW2 needs the trinity in order for it to feel less like it's piss easy, like that would help in any way shape or form.
The fact of the matter is, dungeons, bosses, mobs, all need to be well designed in order to force the players into working together. It doesn't matter whether you have a trinity or not, if your encounter isn't designed to foster teamwork, it will just be faceroll and that's a fact. Mothanos may believe that you need a Guardian and a Warrior to finish content in GW2, but as a Guardian myself, I know for a fact that you do not need this class to finish content. Only elitists who follow the crowd believe such fallacy. I personally have finished content with 4 Rangers and only me as the Guardian and how did we do it? I told all of them to run specific skills that would help the group survive. It also helps if your team actually listens.
Anyway, I think it's silly to believe that the trinity provides anything other than a small semblance of organization when the true test of teamwork comes from the encounter itself. Mothanos himself gave a good example of this with the description of his WoW raiding days.
This is not a game.
Look fella, if you're going to correct people, at least get your facts straight.
You say I'm wrong about there being 4 class abilities, then say there are 4 class abilities. I know there are weapon abilities also, but weapon abilities and class abilities are different. You can tell, because weapons are different than classes. Different letters, different words, different definitions.
Tanks in EQ didn't protect anyone 100%. Not even close. Hardly a fight went by where mobs didn't stray at some point, even if the tank was chain casting aggro spells, or procing agro weapons with max dex. There were so many intricate variables involved in combat and threat management in EQ1, it would make most of you children of Azeroth blow a gasket.
Ohh god, that was hilarious, its signature worthy I think
, way to give the argument away in a single sentence.
As people have said before we dont know enough about this game to identify major issues other than speculating about it.
They are talking about something like Vindictus it seems. All classes are basically DPS, and the mob attacks everyone and you have no aggro system.
But tanks block and caster double dodge and DPS might slip under the mob.
So yes, you can say.........there are still tanks...........but that's a joke also, they don't actually tank....they just shield block.
Vindictus is basically an AE aggro ping pong game.
It's fun for a bit, but it has no community because you don't need a healer...you don't need a tank...you don't depend on anyone.
Also these actions systems have no support rolls, no CC, no pulling. They're just DPS fests. And they are all DPS fests, I have not seen an exception yet.
I am correct.. maybe i wasn't clear.. the point is that wpn abilities ARE class abilities. Just as in guild wars the wpn has different effects based on what class you are. For example... even if a cleric uses a mace/ shield or sword/shield that doesn't mean it would then be primarily be dps.. it could have 2 wpn heal skills with the wpn skill set. They didn't really go into how it works.. but it would be logical to say that if the class is called a cleric most of its abilities.. even if they are on the wpn.. will still be some type of healing or support skill.. every wpn does different things for different classes.. therefore they qualify as class skills... if they did the same thing for every class they would be wpn skills.. which is why i called them wpn/class abilities.. because the abilites are dependent on both what class you are and what wpn you are using.
edit... but then again your point may have been that the 4 wpn/class abilities are not able to be changed and that would almost make my posts in response to urs moot. other than the fact that the ability pool would be changed to 8 and not 4..two set of 4 abilities based on ur equiped wpn/class. being disappointed in the number of abilities is understandable... but as some have posted before me... as long as the abilities are interesting and useful.... 8 abilities are enough.