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!

Holy Trinity

12467

Comments

  • UnlightUnlight Ottawa, ONPosts: 2,540Member

    Originally posted by gobla

    Originally posted by Shroom_Mage



    The roles you describe are essentially what ANet is already doing with their "control" role. It's (hopefully) not enough to completely stunlock everything you encounter, so the effects don't need to be drastically reduced in PvP. Some of them are (such as fear), but in general, a knockback is a knockback.

    A point I want to make, however, is that unless your crowd control is perfect, allowing you to "cheese" any fight, adding a dedicated healer will always make the fight easier, allowing you to handle more difficult encounters. Basically, take the best team you can come up with that doesn't have a healer, then throw in a healer, and it gets better every time.

    From what I hear ANet is not going with any dedicated classes at all.

    They're going with an each class can do a bit of everything system. Every class can heal a bit, every class can crowd control a bit etc.

    And I think it's a shame that they're going that way. I ( personally ) enjoy dedicated classes.

    And on your point:

    Mobs would have to be balanced around this as well. The current MMO design of bosses hitting 50% of a tank's hp will not work. The current design of healers being able to heal 25% of a tank's hp in a single big heal will not work.

    You first need to tone down healers. Currently they just heal way too much. They're basically providing unlimited HP while they still have mana. They need to be able to heal a limited amount but mostly focus on protection spells as I said previously.

    You'd need a system that's built around player's slowly losing HP. Players should always end a battle with less HP than they started it with. Currently your tank either has 75%+ HP or he's dead.

    A system in which the health bars of your party are constantly decreasing as well as those of your enemies. The trick is in making sure your enemies decrease faster. As such you'd need your standard DPS to make your enemies health go down, but that's only half. Next you need ways of making your own health go down slower. Not making it go all the way back up, just making it go down slower.

    So you'd have small heals which can not be cast over and over and over again. But have to be used tactically when really needed to give a member who's especially low a small triage boost. You'd have protection spells which cause party members to take less damage. You'd have stuns which give you a break in receiving damage. You'd have debuffs which lead to enemies dealing less damage.

    This way every member is working towards the common goal of making the enemy die faster than they're making you die. But without taking away dedicated classes. Each class has a real role and mechanic. Instead of every class having a diffirent gimmick of the same mechanic.

    The only downside is that you'd no longer have big crits to show off in your youtube movies. But for me this would be a great tactical and interesting system.

    Do note that I'm not saying GW2's system is bad. I'm just saying it's not a system I think I'll enjoy and that it's a shame that the cost of it is an amazing class like the monk not making it's return.

    This sounds like a Guardian and a Water Elementalist.  If your companions are taking a beating, the Ele can swap to Water to slow down and even reverse the health loss for a little while.  This can probably be improved by speccing for it.  The Guardian is all about damage mitigation by laying down walls and bubbles to prevent damage in the first place. 

    What sets these classes apart from the traditional MMO's calcified class systems is that they can change their role on the battlefield when they need to.  If the Guardian is keeping the damage at bay, the Ele can stay in Fire and blast away.  Is there too much incoming damage for it to be mitigated?  Others can self-heal their way through it.  Still too much?  Jump to Water and help replenish.  Need some serious damage output quickly, everyone goes on the offensive for max damage -- even the so-called support classes.  Need to bug out fast?  Everyone still on their feet can layout out some CC and buy time to regroup. 

    With this system, you can always contribute.  Even the healers when there's no need for healing.  It's all about recognizing opportunity (or pending disaster) and reacting to it before it's too late.  While this is likely going to make combat just too hectic and dynamic for some, for many others, it's a welcome shake up.  You role is to win the battle.  How you do that is at your discretion and is not defined by a class archtype.

    I understand the concerns of people who prefer to play dedicated healing roles since I always enjoyed that myself.  The first character I had that finished Prophesies back in the day, was my Monk.  But I also have to admit that it was cool to be the center of attenion.  Your presence is mandatory.  Your safety takes precedence over everything else -- all other priorities rescinded (right Ash?).  But that also breeds a bit of arrogance, which frankly, is where I see most of the criticism coming from.  Healers will not be special and precious in this game.  No one will be more important than another.  And I think this is why many have a hard time accepting it.  This goes for dedicated tanks too.  There's no longer a spotlight for them to stand in while they keep a boss's focus.  They're going to have to work for a living like the rest of us ground pounders.  It's no wonder there's push back for GW2's class system.

  • AKASlaphappyAKASlaphappy Boise, IDPosts: 800Member

    Originally posted by gobla

    I however do like discussing the changes in MMOs. Even if they're changes I don't think I'll personally enjoy. I'm not going to censor myself just because there's a bunch of people unwilling to accept that not everyone will like the system they're so extremely hyped up over.

     


    I am not asking you to censor yourself; I was just trying to point out that the Developers did not just abandon people like you, people that like support classes. In fact that is exactly what they designed the Guardian to be, and that is what I was trying to point out. I just did not see you looking at that fact at all, when you were making your posts, so I was trying to say “hey what about this?”!  I was not saying I do not agree with you and you should stop posting.


     


    Originally posted by gobla

    But there's another side as well. The side of the trinity class done right. The GW Monk. A class with a 100% focus on allies and support without falling into the healbot trap. An amazing interactive class that provides the thrill of a burst DPS class for a healing class!

    The guardian by very definition of the loss of trinity can not be a 100% ally and support focussed character. If he were then either it would be needed and you'd be back to waiting for guardians to come along or it wouldn't be needed and guardians speccing 100% support would just be gimping themselves and providing support that nobody needs.

    I'm not saying this upside outweighs the downside. Not at all. But losing the trinity is not the ultimate solution. It does have downsides. It does have negative aspects. The trinity isn't just a tool for lazy developers. Neither is it the best system around. GW2s system may well be a better one. But we're not there yet.

     


    Well with the 10 slots on the bar in GW2, it looks like with the example that Meowhead provided, that you could have 8 out of 10 skills as support. That is a grand total of 80% support with certain weapons, so you are right you cannot be 100% support. But you will have as many support skills as a protection monk had, since GW only had an 8 slot tool bar. If that is not enough for you as a support player, then I guess you are right GW2 is just not for you.


     


    As for the part in red; there is another possibility you either do not know about because you have not listed to the developers talk about the professions, or you just willfully left it out.  As I stated above it looks like right now the Guardian can be 80% support and not be gimped and is not needed by groups. How is this possible, you might ask, well let’s look at GW and then the design for GW2 (as stated by the developers and seen in videos). 


     


    In GW out of the 10 classes there were really only 2 choices for support for doing hard mode dungeons, the monk and the ritualist. The monk of course with the Protection and healing lines that people wanted, but you could also use ritualist to fulfill the same roles (of course you need to find ritualist with the elite skills you needed). A ritualist with soul twisting and the spirts for protecting party members, was just as powerful at damage mitigation as the Monk. Plus you had the healing line with the ritualist that was somewhat equal to monk healing. So a whooping 2 out of 10 hence why they were needed by groups, and why people would set around towns looking  asking for them. That number would drop to 1 if the leader was a minmaxer, since they would take 2 monks over having 3 ritualist in your party. I have never been a minmaxer so I did both when I was the group former, I have ran slaver’s exile with 4 ritualist ( the Ritualist were running SoS, ST, SoGM, and healing). It was extremely challenging, but as a group working together we were able to clear 2 wings before people had to take off.  


     


    Now let’s look at GW2; by the design the developers have talked about my options are going to 8 out of 8 for whatever role I need. If I need support, range DPS, melee DPS, control or whatever; I will not need to find a specific class to fulfill it, I will just need to find someone willing to spec their traits to meet the needs of the group. For example, if I need a range DPS I will need to wait for a ranger or Elementalist to show up. I could just find a warrior that is willing to trait for bow damage, or a Thief that is willing to trait for pistol damage, or a Guardian that is willing to trait for high spiritual weapon damage. All of these options fulfill that role, maybe not in the same way as an Elementalist and maybe not as good. But they are still a option to me because I am not a minmaxer.  Just like in GW I would take 4 ritualist, in GW2 not I have the option to do whatever I want in group without harming the group. This goes for support too, I do not need a Guardian for support even though I have no doubt they will be extremely powerful in their support role (again watch the developer play the Charr Guardian).  I can always get a warrior to spec for support, or a necromancer, or a ranger, or a thief, well I think you get the idea. Yes they classes may not be as strong in certain ways as the Guardian in support, but neither was the ritualist in GW compared to the monk. But to me and many more that played GW the ritualist was a viable option just like all the classes are going to be in GW2.  Now as a minmaxer which from reading your posts you are, it would probably make more since to just wait to find a Guardian that has his traits setup for 80% support for 5 man dungeon runs. I have no doubt in this way there will be a need for Guardians just like there was a need for monks in GW. But thankfully for the rest of us that are not minmaxers I can run a dungeon with 5 necromancers and be completely unaware of the optimal group makeup for a dungeon. I can keep my 4 ritualist and the minmaxers can have their two monks for the perfect group.  


     


    Also as for the power of a support Guardian possible being gimped, I do not see that happened from watching that Charr Guardian. In fact I see it being the opposite for PVP, in PVE they might not be absolutely needed, but I have a feeling it will be different in PVP. Imagine in the mists running into a group of enemies while you are trying to take a mine, and you do not have any Guardians in your group, and the enemy does.  The Guardian in the other group could instantly start using his abilities to make it so your group can not progress forward for periods of time, while at the same time stopping your range from hitting him and his allies. During those seconds his group can unload on your group with immunity, since they are taking no damage. That one Guardian by himself could dictate the outcome of the battle, because of his support abilities if they are used smartly. If that is not powerful, then I do not know what is. And to me that matches the play style of the protection monk perfectly, it might not to you, but I can see the potential of being an extremely powerful support class.


     


    That last part to me that you wrote is extremely confusing, you state yourself that their maybe ways better then the trinity or the trinity could be the best. But with all your posts at least to me it sounds like you are extremely against any system that does not pigeon hold you into a certain class play style. So to me you saying that the trinity is not the best system around; is an oxymoron! How can that be possible for you when you sound so utterly against any system that does not follow the trinity of making classes play a certain way. Like I said that statement uttered by you, is completely confusing. As for me, I willing to give any system a shot, to see what it ends up playing like. To me the trinity is not the be all end all of gaming, so I am willing to look at any system with a open mind. And who knows in the end I might hate the combat in GW2, and I might find another I like that is closer to what the trinity is.


  • ircaddictsircaddicts LA, CAPosts: 146Member

    Not geting into this debate except to say that there is a third support class in GW that slaphappy forgot  and one thats used a LOT. Its the Paragon. Espicaly in the UW.

    Top 3 MMO's PRE-CU SWG GW1 Lotro

    Worst 2 wow and eve

  • goblagobla somewherePosts: 1,411Member

    Originally posted by AKASlaphappy

    <snip>

    I'm talking about 3 systems:



    1. Holy trinity with heal-bot and taunt-tank.


    2. System without trinity.


    3. trinity system with improved healer and tank mechanics.


    I'm saying that System 1 < System 2 < System 3.


     


    So abandoning the trinity is better then keeping a broken heal-bot and taunt-tank system. It's however not better, in my opinion, then replacing the heal-bot and taunt-tank with actual interesting mechanics.


     


    Dismissing a broken system is good. Fixing a broken system is better. Problem is we haven't figured out yet how to fix the system. So GW2 is, in my opinion, taking the easier route of just dismissing it.


     


    Also the problem I'm seeing with your whole explanation is that basically it seems it won't fix anything. Why?


     


    There wasn't a shortage of Monks because people hated Monks. There was a shortage of Monks because people hated playing support.


     


    Allowing every class to play support will just lead to players either refusing to fill their support role or being forced into it and playing it horribly. And since the choice is no longer based on wether or not a player wants to play support ( because apperantly playing support, like a healer, is boring. ) it will instead be determined by which class is slightly better at that support role. And that class will then again be funneled into the support role as so many hybrids are. And because they're hybrids they won't even be able to provide the interesting and unique skill combinations that a pure support class would because by their very design only a small amount of their skills are aimed at support.


     


    You say that I can get 8 support skills just like a Monk on the Guardian, but how many support skills total will the Guardian have? The Monk had over a hundred. Meaning you had hundreds of viable ways of filling those slots. Even for the most obsessive min/maxer you still had over 10 builds that were all viable. Will the guardian or any other class in GW2 have so many ways of filling a single role? I doubt it. I hope they do, but I doubt it.


     


    More likely there will 2/3 viable weapon choices for a role and 2/3 viable utility skill choices. Combining for under 10 viable builds. An obsessive min/maxer could probably scrap over half of those meaning we're left with 3/4 choices. Granted, being able to combo your skills with others will allow for some extra flexibility but the whole reason why support and tank classes had to go was that players want to be viable on their own, without relying on others.


     


    Allowing every class to support isn't the solution. Making supporting an interesting and fun activity is. Which is why a system where every class can fill an unique but always fun and interesting role is better then a system in which every class can fulfill every role, some of them fun and some of them not. But we haven't figured out how to make such a system yet. So for now GW2s system is better then we have. It's an improvement, I agree with that. But I disagree that it's some sort of ultimate system that all games should adopt.

    We are the bunny.
    Resistance is futile.
    ''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\
    ( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o)
    (")("),,(")("),(")(")

  • romanator0romanator0 Glendora, CAPosts: 2,382Member

    Originally posted by gobla

    Originally posted by AKASlaphappy

    I'm talking about 3 systems:



    1. Holy trinity with heal-bot and taunt-tank.


    2. System without trinity.


    3. trinity system with improved healer and tank mechanics.


    I'm saying that System 1 < System 2 < System 3.


     


    So abandoning the trinity is better then keeping a broken heal-bot and taunt-tank system. It's however not better, in my opinion, then replacing the heal-bot and taunt-tank with actual interesting mechanics.


     


    Dismissing a broken system is good. Fixing a broken system is better. Problem is we haven't figured out yet how to fix the system. So GW2 is, in my opinion, taking the easier route of just dismissing it.


     


    Also the problem I'm seeing with your whole explanation is that basically it seems it won't fix anything. Why?


     


    There wasn't a shortage of Monks because people hated Monks. There was a shortage of Monks because people hated playing support.


     


    Allowing every class to play support will just lead to players either refusing to fill their support role or being forced into it and playing it horribly. And since the choice is no longer based on wether or not a player wants to play support ( because apperantly playing support, like a healer, is boring. ) it will instead be determined by which class is slightly better at that support role. And that class will then again be funneled into the support role as so many hybrids are. And because they're hybrids they won't even be able to provide the interesting and unique skill combinations that a pure support class would because by their very design only a small amount of their skills are aimed at support.


     


    You say that I can get 8 support skills just like a Monk on the Guardian, but how many support skills total will the Guardian have? The Monk had over a hundred. Meaning you had hundreds of viable ways of filling those slots. Even for the most obsessive min/maxer you still had over 10 builds that were all viable. Will the guardian or any other class in GW2 have so many ways of filling a single role? I doubt it. I hope they do, but I doubt it.


     


    More likely there will 2/3 viable weapon choices for a role and 2/3 viable utility skill choices. Combining for under 10 viable builds. An obsessive min/maxer could probably scrap over half of those meaning we're left with 3/4 choices. Granted, being able to combo your skills with others will allow for some extra flexibility but the whole reason why support and tank classes had to go was that players want to be viable on their own, without relying on others.


     


    Allowing every class to support isn't the solution. Making supporting an interesting and fun activity is. Which is why a system where every class can fill an unique but always fun and interesting role is better then a system in which every class can fulfill every role, some of them fun and some of them not. But we haven't figured out how to make such a system yet. So for now GW2s system is better then we have. It's an improvement, I agree with that. But I disagree that it's some sort of ultimate system that all games should adopt.

    These are the 2 problems with the holy trinity:

    1) LF Tank/Healer

    2) Dull Tank and Spank combat

    Changing the way tanking and healing works may fix problem 2, but it still leaves problem 1.

    Anet wants to get rid of both problems. The only way to get rid of "LF Tank/Healer" is to get rid of tanks and healers and putting everybody on equal footing and allowing them to contribute to the group in their own way.

    Simply changing the way tanks and healers works will still make it so that tanks and healers are the only 2 necessary people and everybody else is just there to make the fights go faster.

    The reason I think you don't like Anet getting rid of healers and tanks is because you were a healer (you already said this) and you were the most necessary person in the group. You even said earlier in the thread that you were the "backbone" of the group. The problem with that is that everybody else wasn't as important.

    Until you can find a way to make everybody else as important as the healers and tanks then I don't think we are ever going to find a better solution than just getting rid of them.

    To the orange part: This comment shows that you are still stuck in the holy trinity mindset and not thinking in the way that Anet wants you to.

    People aren't going to spec for support and do an entire dungeon that way. Anet is allowing you to switch between weapon sets in the middle of combat so that people can switch between 2 or more entirely different playstyles. They want you to react to how the battle is going and changing up your style rather than just utilizing a single role. Anet wants people to support when support is needed, CC when CC is needed and damage when damage is needed. They don't want people to be only doing damage, or only doing CC, or only doing support and pigeon-holing themselves into certain roles (like you are wanting them to).

    image

  • jondifooljondifool cphPosts: 1,114Member

    Originally posted by romanator0


     

    These are the 2 problems with the holy trinity:

    1) LF Tank/Healer

    2) Dull Tank and Spank combat

    Changing the way tanking and healing works may fix problem 2, but it still leaves problem 1.

    Anet wants to get rid of both problems. The only way to get rid of "LF Tank/Healer" is to get rid of tanks and healers and putting everybody on equal footing and allowing them to contribute to the group in their own way.

    Simply changing the way tanks and healers works will still make it so that tanks and healers are the only 2 necessary people and everybody else is just there to make the fights go faster.

    The reason I think you don't like Anet getting rid of healers and tanks is because you were a healer (you already said this) and you were the most necessary person in the group. You even said earlier in the thread that you were the "backbone" of the group. The problem with that is that everybody else wasn't as important.

    Until you can find a way to make everybody else as important as the healers and tanks then I don't think we are ever going to find a better solution than just getting rid of them.

     Thats as clear as it gets !

    read how to create a succesfull mmo before posting about GW2. And read tao of ArenaNet before talking about innovation in GW2

  • goblagobla somewherePosts: 1,411Member

    Originally posted by romanator0

    These are the 2 problems with the holy trinity:

    1) LF Tank/Healer

    2) Dull Tank and Spank combat

    Changing the way tanking and healing works may fix problem 2, but it still leaves problem 1.

    Anet wants to get rid of both problems. The only way to get rid of "LF Tank/Healer" is to get rid of tanks and healers and putting everybody on equal footing and allowing them to contribute to the group in their own way.

    Simply changing the way tanks and healers works will still make it so that tanks and healers are the only 2 necessary people and everybody else is just there to make the fights go faster.

    The reason I think you don't like Anet getting rid of healers and tanks is because you were a healer (you already said this) and you were the most necessary person in the group. You even said earlier in the thread that you were the "backbone" of the group. The problem with that is that everybody else wasn't as important.

    Until you can find a way to make everybody else as important as the healers and tanks then I don't think we are ever going to find a better solution than just getting rid of them.

    If problem 2 is fixed and tanks/healers are no longer boring then players will more often play tanks/healers as they are now a fun and interesting playstyle. Thus solving problem 1.

    You're right though. I like being an important, meaningfull, contributing and needed member of my group. I don't need to more important then anyone else. But I do want to feel like I'm doing something that nobody else in the group could do. Like I'm an unique part of the group.

    So the problem is how to make everyone important? How to create a trinity ( or quartet etc. ) where every role is equally important. Where everyone has certain skills that benefit everyone else in the party.

    The more I think about it the more I think that Healers and Tanks aren't the problem. It's the DPS that needs to go. Or more accurately needs to be replaced. Create a trinity of Tank/Controller/Healer ( and no, DCUO does not have this... ).

    Link damage instead to the classes their mechanics. Make it a reward for fulfilling your role. A tank that gets hit slowly raises his damage the more blows he receives. A controller's debuffs do additional damage the more debuffed enemies there are. A healer's heals start damaging enemies around his targets the more damage he prevents or heals.

    This creates a system of challenge. A tank's damage increases when gets hit more. So you need to get more mobs to hit your tank. So you pull more. Tank starts taking a lot more damage, so the healer needs to heal it up. In turn the healer's damage increases and starts damaging the enemies around the tank. Tank's health is doing good and tank and healer are doing tons of damage. But we want more. So we pull more mobs. Tank gets hit more so does even more damage. The healer's protection spells protect even more so the healer does more damage. But the healer's heals can't keep up. We don't want to fight fewer enemies so we need to instead weaken them. Luckily the controller saves the day. He debuffs all the mobs, and crowd controls a few. Since we're already pulling a whole load of mobs the controller's damage skyrockets just like that of the Tank and Healer. The mobs now deal less damage and everyone is surviving again.

    As long as everyone keeps doing their job we'll continue killing stuff at a rapid level. If anyone drops the ball we all die and next time we'll have to pull fewer mobs and kill stuff at a slower pace. If the tank loses control of the mobs we die. If the healer messes up his protection spells we die. If the controller uses the wrong debuffs we die. Everyone has a clear and interesting role and everyone is important.


    To the orange part: This comment shows that you are still stuck in the holy trinity mindset and not thinking in the way that Anet wants you to.

    People aren't going to spec for support and do an entire dungeon that way. Anet is allowing you to switch between weapon sets in the middle of combat so that people can switch between 2 or more entirely different playstyles. They want you to react to how the battle is going and changing up your style rather than just utilizing a single role. Anet wants people to support when support is needed, CC when CC is needed and damage when damage is needed. They don't want people to be only doing damage, or only doing CC, or only doing support and pigeon-holing themselves into certain roles (like you are wanting them to).

    There's a reason why people specialise in everything they do. Specialisation means you can focus all your attention on knowledge on a single thing.

    Even if that's the design there will still be people assigned to support. Else you'll just run into situations where, when support is needed, player 1 thinks player 2 will do it. Player 2 thinks player 3 will do it and player 3 thinks player 1 will do it. In the end nobody does it. Or maybe everyone does it. Either you wipe or you waste a lot of mana. So somebody will be on support duty so that everyone can be certain that when support is needed he does it. Instead of either nobody or everybody.

    In addition to that using your skills the right way will take knowledge and understanding. It's generally better to have 3 people each understanding a single style completely then having 3 people each understanding all styles a little bit.

    We are the bunny.
    Resistance is futile.
    ''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\
    ( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o)
    (")("),,(")("),(")(")

  • romanator0romanator0 Glendora, CAPosts: 2,382Member

    Originally posted by gobla

    Originally posted by romanator0

    These are the 2 problems with the holy trinity:

    1) LF Tank/Healer

    2) Dull Tank and Spank combat

    Changing the way tanking and healing works may fix problem 2, but it still leaves problem 1.

    Anet wants to get rid of both problems. The only way to get rid of "LF Tank/Healer" is to get rid of tanks and healers and putting everybody on equal footing and allowing them to contribute to the group in their own way.

    Simply changing the way tanks and healers works will still make it so that tanks and healers are the only 2 necessary people and everybody else is just there to make the fights go faster.

    The reason I think you don't like Anet getting rid of healers and tanks is because you were a healer (you already said this) and you were the most necessary person in the group. You even said earlier in the thread that you were the "backbone" of the group. The problem with that is that everybody else wasn't as important.

    Until you can find a way to make everybody else as important as the healers and tanks then I don't think we are ever going to find a better solution than just getting rid of them.

    If problem 2 is fixed and tanks/healers are no longer boring then players will more often play tanks/healers as they are now a fun and interesting playstyle. Thus solving problem 1.

    You're right though. I like being an important, meaningfull, contributing and needed member of my group. I don't need to more important then anyone else. But I do want to feel like I'm doing something that nobody else in the group could do. Like I'm an unique part of the group.

    So the problem is how to make everyone important? How to create a trinity ( or quartet etc. ) where every role is equally important. Where everyone has certain skills that benefit everyone else in the party.

    The more I think about it the more I think that Healers and Tanks aren't the problem. It's the DPS that needs to go. Or more accurately needs to be replaced. Create a trinity of Tank/Controller/Healer ( and no, DCUO does not have this... ).

    Link damage instead to the classes their mechanics. Make it a reward for fulfilling your role. A tank that gets hit slowly raises his damage the more blows he receives. A controller's debuffs do additional damage the more debuffed enemies there are. A healer's heals start damaging enemies around his targets the more damage he prevents or heals.

    This creates a system of challenge. A tank's damage increases when gets hit more. So you need to get more mobs to hit your tank. So you pull more. Tank starts taking a lot more damage, so the healer needs to heal it up. In turn the healer's damage increases and starts damaging the enemies around the tank. Tank's health is doing good and tank and healer are doing tons of damage. But we want more. So we pull more mobs. Tank gets hit more so does even more damage. The healer's protection spells protect even more so the healer does more damage. But the healer's heals can't keep up. We don't want to fight fewer enemies so we need to instead weaken them. Luckily the controller saves the day. He debuffs all the mobs, and crowd controls a few. Since we're already pulling a whole load of mobs the controller's damage skyrockets just like that of the Tank and Healer. The mobs now deal less damage and everyone is surviving again.

    As long as everyone keeps doing their job we'll continue killing stuff at a rapid level. If anyone drops the ball we all die and next time we'll have to pull fewer mobs and kill stuff at a slower pace. If the tank loses control of the mobs we die. If the healer messes up his protection spells we die. If the controller uses the wrong debuffs we die. Everyone has a clear and interesting role and everyone is important.

    No. You are still stuck in the trinity mindset. Now instead of "LF tank/healer" it is now "LF tank/healer/CC".

    GW2 is going for "LFG" or "LF member". You are still pigeon-holing people into certain roles. GW2 is trying to make it so that people AREN'T pigeon-holed into certain roles.

    Getting replacing dps with crowd-controllers would actually make the first problem worse as you would have to search for that third person rather than just the tank and healer.

    image

  • goblagobla somewherePosts: 1,411Member

    Originally posted by romanator0

    No. You are still stuck in the trinity mindset. Now instead of "LF tank/healer" it is now "LF tank/healer/CC".

    GW2 is going for "LFG" or "LF member". You are still pigeon-holing people into certain roles. GW2 is trying to make it so that people AREN'T pigeon-holed into certain roles.

    Getting replacing dps with crowd-controllers would actually make the first problem worse as you would have to search for that third person rather than just the tank and healer.

    Seeing as tank/healer/CC are all the possible roles it's logically equivalent to member.

    But let's just agree to disagree. We don't seem to be going anywhere at all.

    I believe that no matter the game mechanics people will focus on a single role. Even if only to be absolutely certain that role gets done. Sharing roles only works if there's a person who holds the end responsibility. So that person would still be pigeon-holed into that role no matter what. And since we're being pigeon-holed anyway we might as well make all the roles we can get pigeon-holed into fun, important and challenging roles.

    You believe that I'm wrong and that sharing roles can be done without somebody holding the end responsiblity. I'd like you to be right. I hope you are. But I can't make myself believe it.

    We are the bunny.
    Resistance is futile.
    ''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\
    ( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o)
    (")("),,(")("),(")(")

  • CookieTimeCookieTime SomewherePosts: 353Member

    Originally posted by Unlight

    I understand the concerns of people who prefer to play dedicated healing roles since I always enjoyed that myself.  The first character I had that finished Prophesies back in the day, was my Monk.  But I also have to admit that it was cool to be the center of attenion.  Your presence is mandatory.  Your safety takes precedence over everything else -- all other priorities rescinded (right Ash?).  But that also breeds a bit of arrogance, which frankly, is where I see most of the criticism coming from.  Healers will not be special and precious in this game.  No one will be more important than another.  And I think this is why many have a hard time accepting it.  This goes for dedicated tanks too.  There's no longer a spotlight for them to stand in while they keep a boss's focus.  They're going to have to work for a living like the rest of us ground pounders.  It's no wonder there's push back for GW2's class system.

    QFT. Sums up my thoughts pretty well.

    Eat me!

  • Master10KMaster10K LondonPosts: 3,065Member

    Originally posted by gobla



    ...

    So the problem is how to make everyone important? How to create a trinity ( or quartet etc. ) where every role is equally important. Where everyone has certain skills that benefit everyone else in the party.

    The more I think about it the more I think that Healers and Tanks aren't the problem. It's the DPS that needs to go. Or more accurately needs to be replaced. Create a trinity of Tank/Controller/Healer ( and no, DCUO does not have this... ).

    Link damage instead to the classes their mechanics. Make it a reward for fulfilling your role. A tank that gets hit slowly raises his damage the more blows he receives. A controller's debuffs do additional damage the more debuffed enemies there are. A healer's heals start damaging enemies around his targets the more damage he prevents or heals.

    This creates a system of challenge. A tank's damage increases when gets hit more. So you need to get more mobs to hit your tank. So you pull more. Tank starts taking a lot more damage, so the healer needs to heal it up. In turn the healer's damage increases and starts damaging the enemies around the tank. Tank's health is doing good and tank and healer are doing tons of damage. But we want more. So we pull more mobs. Tank gets hit more so does even more damage. The healer's protection spells protect even more so the healer does more damage. But the healer's heals can't keep up. We don't want to fight fewer enemies so we need to instead weaken them. Luckily the controller saves the day. He debuffs all the mobs, and crowd controls a few. Since we're already pulling a whole load of mobs the controller's damage skyrockets just like that of the Tank and Healer. The mobs now deal less damage and everyone is surviving again.

    As long as everyone keeps doing their job we'll continue killing stuff at a rapid level. If anyone drops the ball we all die and next time we'll have to pull fewer mobs and kill stuff at a slower pace. If the tank loses control of the mobs we die. If the healer messes up his protection spells we die. If the controller uses the wrong debuffs we die. Everyone has a clear and interesting role and everyone is important.

    Well isn't that exactly what Rift is doing with the hybrid class' created in its soul system? I haven't played it myself, so I can't know for sure, but I know that you can spec a Mage DPS (Chloromancer) that heals as you do damage, a Warrior Tank (Void-knight) that ramps up its damage as it recieves a certain kind of damage and a Rogue CC (Saboteur) that can easily nuke a target after stacking a bunch of debuffs. But the problem with Rift's soul system is that, even with all these options, if you stray too far from the holy trinity you'll gimp your class.

    So in the sort of system you are proposing you'll just get people complaining that you're "doing it wrong". Since when you've got a game with the holy trinity, but allow people to stray from the trinity; you'll have a lot of people making characters that can do multiple things but just useless overall.

    image

  • Master10KMaster10K LondonPosts: 3,065Member

    Just to re-iterate a previous point... this Guardian looks very support friendly and that's even before speccing it to support. Just look at the skill descriptions & traits shown.

    image

  • qombiqombi Unknown, LAPosts: 1,180Member

    I don't mind a new approach as long as it is still tough in dungeons to succeed. I would hope you could still fail or even more so now if everyone is not playing smart by crowd control and using abilities to reduce damage. It has to be better than WoWs garbage face plowing through dungeons now.

  • romanator0romanator0 Glendora, CAPosts: 2,382Member

    Originally posted by qombi

    I don't mind a new approach as long as it is still tough in dungeons to succeed. I would hope you could still fail or even more so now if everyone is not playing smart by crowd control and using abilities to reduce damage. It has to be better than WoWs garbage face plowing through dungeons now.

    It was said a long time ago that dungeons were going to be designed so that they were the most difficult content in the game. At PAX East Jeff Grubb said that the skill and learning curve for each dungeon would go up for each explorable mode you do.

    image

  • goblagobla somewherePosts: 1,411Member

    Originally posted by Master10K

    Well isn't that exactly what Rift is doing with the hybrid class' created in its soul system? I haven't played it myself, so I can't know for sure, but I know that you can spec a Mage DPS (Chloromancer) that heals as you do damage, a Warrior Tank (Void-knight) that ramps up its damage as it recieves a certain kind of damage and a Rogue CC (Saboteur) that can easily nuke a target after stacking a bunch of debuffs. But the problem with Rift's soul system is that, even with all these options, if you stray too far from the holy trinity you'll gimp your class.

    So in the sort of system you are proposing you'll just get people complaining that you're "doing it wrong". Since when you've got a game with the holy trinity, but allow people to stray from the trinity; you'll have a lot of people making characters that can do multiple things but just useless overall.

    The whole idea is to create a system in which you can't stray from the trinity. No matter what class or spec you're always performing a fun, interesting and needed role in the party. As the tank class you can pick multiple ways to tank but you're always a tank. There's no way to DPS as a tank except by doing your job. As a healer you're always a healer. You can spec to change your style ( HoTs vs Direct etc. ) but you always heal. Only way to damage is through your mechanic.

    In the end no matter what you spec you're always able to perform the role you need to. The only way to do it wrong is by failing your role. You can take all the fun and interesting specs and then adept them to perform the role you want them to. Pets are cool? Create a pet system in which pets can debuff enemies around them and assist in the controller role. Wards and such are cool? Create a warding system which traps enemies inside the ward with only you, the tank. Thus forcing them to attack you since they can't reach your allies. Teleportation is cool? Create a healer that can only heal in melee range but has several teleportations to instantly jump from ally to ally.

    You get a system allowing for a large amount of playstyles that are all usefull, fun and interesting. Balance won't be perfect, but that's a given in all games. But with so many ways to heal, tank or CC you're bound to always find someone who enjoyes one of these ways.

    The problem is that in a lot of MMOs the needed roles are the boring ones while the fun roles aren't really needed in groups. I say make all roles fun and needed while still retaining their unique aspects.

    We are the bunny.
    Resistance is futile.
    ''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\
    ( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o)
    (")("),,(")("),(")(")

  • MilkopilkoMilkopilko PerthPosts: 28Member

    I really feel sorry for arenanet. There are so many people who just don't understand what they're doing

  • Loke666Loke666 MalmöPosts: 17,940Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by Milkopilko

    I really feel sorry for arenanet. There are so many people who just don't understand what they're doing

    Don't. If the game is fun enough people will buy it no matter how critical they are before launch.

    It do sounds good to me so far but we can't really say that. ANET will sell as many copies of the game as they deserve so if it is good enough even many of the people who complains most will eventually buy it.

    If not then it wont do so well. So it sorts itself out. :)

  • nomssnomss albany, NYPosts: 1,468Member

    Originally posted by Milkopilko

    I really feel sorry for arenanet. There are so many people who just don't understand what they're doing

    People will come around soon. There are some people who have not been keeping up with the game very well. But lots of things GW2 has going are rather quite new.

  • KanethKaneth Posts: 1,919Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by Milkopilko

    I really feel sorry for arenanet. There are so many people who just don't understand what they're doing

    I don't really feel sorry for ANet, but I am not envious of the daunting task ahead of them as well. They are breaking years of convention, and it's to be expected that many folks can't wrap their heads around it. Just the fact that they had to add in scouts to act as pesudo quest givers should be a testament of how different GW2 is going to be from any other mmo out there.

    People fear what they don't understand, it's human nature. My only fear is that the combat system is going to be so different (and awesome) that GW2 is going to completely ruin all traditional mmos for me.

  • StydusStydus Port Charlotte, FLPosts: 50Member

    I love the fact that they destroyed the Holy Trinity, it really creates diversity and allows anyone to play with anyone and I really think some people have a hard time understanding this.

    Also @Gobla, no offence but I think you are being really narrow minded on the subject, regardless the facts even though they fit into your version of greatness that was experienced in GW you continue to argue the Trinity would be better. Changing the basic idea of LF tank LF healer, and adding CC just adds another problem rather than solving it. I really think you a being stubborn with your point of view rather than trying to see things in a different light.

  • djazzydjazzy louisville, COPosts: 3,578Member

    Some people just have a hard time adjusting to change. If you can't then that's ok, there are plenty of other games out there that cater to your playstyle.

  • goblagobla somewherePosts: 1,411Member

    Narrow-minded means a lack of tolerance. Not a lack of agreement.

    Thereby you're saying I don't tolerate GW2. As I've mentioned countless times I'm not trying to change GW2. I accept GW2 for what it is. I'm fine with GW2.

    I'm not saying GW2 will fail. I'm not saying GW2 sucks. I'm not saying anything about GW2 at all.

    I'm saying that I, in my very personal very subjective opinion, think that a trinity done right is more fun then disregarding the trinity.

    I'm only talking about myself. I'm not talking about you. I'm not talking about the game you're worshipping.

    And when it comes to me I am stubborn. I'm not going to change my own opinion because you're telling me to. I'm not going to change my opinion because you tell me I'm wrong. I'm only going to change my opinion when I see enough facts supporting the change. And seeing as the game isn't released yet those facts simply aren't here.

    Why am I suddenly a stubborn narrow-minded person because I personally think the trinity does have some positive sides?

    Why am I suddenly trying to change the game when I provide examples of a system I think I would enjoy as was asked of me?

    I was unaware that disagreeing with people was narrow-minded. I always thought that being open-minded was all about discussing things with people especially if you disagree with them. And if you disagree with each other you refrain from calling each other stubbon and narrow-minded. And if, after discussing things, you still disagree with each other you have the decency of accepting that not all people believe as you do.

    I'm not telling you to change your opinion. I'm not telling you to change this game. But I'm sure as hell telling you my opinion on a public forum if I so choose.

    We are the bunny.
    Resistance is futile.
    ''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\
    ( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o)
    (")("),,(")("),(")(")

  • KhinRuniteKhinRunite ManilaPosts: 879Member
    Originally posted by gobla

    Narrow-minded means a lack of tolerance. Not a lack of agreement.
    Thereby you're saying I don't tolerate GW2. As I've mentioned countless times I'm not trying to change GW2. I accept GW2 for what it is. I'm fine with GW2.
    I'm not saying GW2 will fail. I'm not saying GW2 sucks. I'm not saying anything about GW2 at all.
    I'm saying that I, in my very personal very subjective opinion, think that a trinity done right is more fun then disregarding the trinity.
    I'm only talking about myself. I'm not talking about you. I'm not talking about the game you're worshipping.
    And when it comes to me I am stubborn. I'm not going to change my own opinion because you're telling me to. I'm not going to change my opinion because you tell me I'm wrong. I'm only going to change my opinion when I see enough facts supporting the change. And seeing as the game isn't released yet those facts simply aren't here.
    Why am I suddenly a stubborn narrow-minded person because I personally think the trinity does have some positive sides?
    Why am I suddenly trying to change the game when I provide examples of a system I think I would enjoy as was asked of me?
    I was unaware that disagreeing with people was narrow-minded. I always thought that being open-minded was all about discussing things with people especially if you disagree with them. And if you disagree with each other you refrain from calling each other stubbon and narrow-minded. And if, after discussing things, you still disagree with each other you have the decency of accepting that not all people believe as you do.
    I'm not telling you to change your opinion. I'm not telling you to change this game. But I'm sure as hell telling you my opinion on a public forum if I so choose.

     

    A question for you, my friend:

    Have you ever been rejected from groups because they're reserving slots for a specific class? Wouldn't it be better if you can join groups a bit more easily, without having to form personal bonds or using politics?
  • goblagobla somewherePosts: 1,411Member

    Originally posted by KhinRunite

    A question for you, my friend: Have you ever been rejected from groups because they're reserving slots for a specific class? Wouldn't it be better if you can join groups a bit more easily, without having to form personal bonds or using politics?

    As I've said before there are 2 sides to this story.

    This is one of them. It sucks to wait on healer and tanks. It sucks to be rejected from group because you're not the right class.

    It's a valid complaint on a very negative side of the trinity. I'm not arguing against that.

    I am arguing that by making every class able to fill every role you're losing something as well.

    A class like the Monk that has over a hundred supportive skills that can be combined in dozens of viable and interesting support builds will be lost. Classes that can fill multiple roles won't have the amount of tools available to them for a single role as a class that focusses on a single role. The devs only have time to create X skills. If they give all supportive skills to a single class then that class will have more supportive skills then another class who received only a portion of said supportive skills ( but did receive other skills in addition. )

    In addition to that there's also a certain joy in building working groups from specialised classes. Taking only 1 healer with you means you risk wiping because there's nobody else there that can fill that role. But the reward is that you're now able to take more from other specialisations to compensate. Taking 2 tanks means you have much less risk of squishies getting agro as the second tank will have his skills ready to intercept that mob, but you lose the utility another specialised class would bring. If all classes can fill all roles and dynamically switch between them then this is lost. There's no longer a tactical aspect to group building. You can just take whatever and it'll always work.

    Wether or not the negatives outweigh the positives is up to each person individually. I'm not trying to make that decision for you. I'm just sharing my opinion that the trinity does have positive sides, and I think it's a loss if you don't at least recognise those. Even if, or especially if, you don't believe they outweigh the positive sides.

    We are the bunny.
    Resistance is futile.
    ''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\
    ( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o)
    (")("),,(")("),(")(")

  • StydusStydus Port Charlotte, FLPosts: 50Member

    I'm not saying change your opinion on it, but regardless of facts you continue to argue the same point with different wording, even when new light is revealed to you on the subject of support in GW2. I'm just saying I think a game that allows everyone to play together is at an advantage, I mean I understand being a healer and liking to be the backbone, but RPG's focus seem to be able to replicate an epic adventure, and never have I heard or seen an epic adventure where a team had to sit around and wait until they could find a healer. I don't mind the trinity but its really annoying when I try to start up an mmo with my friends and I'm unable to play specific classes because they aren't needed or someone is already fufilling that role, it really destroys the immersion, and overall takes away from the fun factor because there are already dps in the group, or already have a tank or healer (though normally people don't mind two healers). Just a very subjective way to look at it because honestly it just seems like you want to be needed rather than genuinely be wanted.

Sign In or Register to comment.