It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Well, I don't like the GW2 system in the slightest; I would rather have roles more clearly defined. But at the same time I don't think that definition needs to be provided by the trinity.
So as many others have pointed out, I can't really answer the OP's question as they are not the only choices available.
Originally posted by Serelisk Originally posted by SavageHorizon Originally posted by Serelisk Originally posted by SavageHorizon I'm glad you love GW2's system, you can play GW2 and we who like the trinity can play games like TESO. Everyone is happy, right?
I wish it was like that... Sigh. Then again, people can justly express their opinions. But there's a clear spread misinformation still on how GW2's system actually works. (6 months in, amazing right? lol) I guess it's okay to just say we're immune to valid criticism whenever we try to explain it. I still like GW2's system because I can play the class I like to play based on the style of play, not the pigeonhole it's ascribed to. So soft trinities are the way to go methinks.
Please note: The Holy Trinity only refers to concrete and non-flexible systems like WoW where there's a dedicated tank, a dedicated healer, and the rest pew pew with no in between.
I played GW2 to level 80 on a norn ranger and 54 with a female norn thief.
As for the holy trinity, please don't try to school me on it i've played MMO's since 1999.
Trinity is best in my opinion but it's like i said.
You can keep enjoying GW2 while the people who like the trinity system can enjoy games like TESO and ArcheAge or any number of MMO's that still use that system.
Pretty simple really options really.
Woah man, sorry for the misunderstanding here. I think we're in agreement, I just sort of used your statement to make a larger comment on this thread and the OP. Most of it was not directed towards you, including but not limited to the note about the trinity.
Mostly at the OP for saying Holy Trinity and then GW2's methods as basically the only options, when there's a bunch of other MMO's that don't use holy trinity which he's probably lumping into that category.
Example: Those who have an issue with the "Holy Trinity" don't necessarily have a problem with trinity games.
Just wanted to clarify my intentions.
Ah i see your point but i wasn't trying to come across as being rude.
I am of the mind that you play what you enjoy at the end of the day. My problem with the OP is that the trinity hasn't gone anywhere it's alive and stronger than ever.
Originally posted by Rydeson I hate the holdy trinity.. You end up with a 3 class game.. DPS, Tank and Heals....... I want to see something similar to the original EQ.. I want to see more roles and hybrids, but that isnt' going to happen unless you throw "PvP" and "Raid" balance out the window.. I want a PURE PvE game with a variety of classes to play.. The more the better
After all my time playing MMO games I'm not even sure if pvp and pve can exist in the same game and garner huge praise from both crowds.
If it focuses on PvP, the PvE crowd have their fun ruined by people in need of ego massaging and leave.
If it focuses on PvE, the PvP crowd scream and moan about how they should be allowed to kill people whenever they want.
If it tries to blend both then neither side is happy as the compromises harm the game's potential.
I'd rather the developers pick PvE or PvP and stick with it. However, the chasing of WoW level subscriber figures will continue, as they seem unwilling to develop a niche corner of the market, when they could be trying to out-WoW WoW!
Originally posted by tixylix Originally posted by Banaghran Originally posted by tixylix I never saw a problem with how WoW did it, with talents you could play many roles. I mean as a Druid I could play Tank, Damage dealer or a healer and yet the trinity still existed because you couldn't do it all at the same time. As a priest I could be a healer or a damage dealer and every class had at least two roles. It's the best class system out of any MMO I've played which uses one. Sadly though WoW got turned to shit.
Well, just out of curiosity, which 2 roles were available to rogues, locks and qqers err, mages ?
But i agree with the last sentence, even if we would probably disagree on the exact point in time.
For me it was when they made it so you can warp to Battlegrounds, it killed world PVP.
Yes, we disagree
But how about the 2 roles for pures?
Originally posted by aSynchro Lets check where the Trinity is useful: _ Leveling : NO. Why level as tank or healer when you can just dps all the way to end game ? Only useful for shorter dungeon queue. _ Quest: NO. Have you try to do WoW dailies as a healer ? Ah ah! _ PvP: NO. Tank can't tank players, so it's only a dps with more health but half the damage. As for Healers, well a battleground with zero healers or with same amount of healers in both team don't really change the whole deal. _ Dungeon : Not really. At first maybe, but with good gear/cc or skilled players you can do it without healer or without tank. _ Raids: YES/Maybe. For classic tank&spank fights. But you can imagine lots of fights that would works without tanks and healers. Just replace non-avoidable damages with avoidable-if-you-move-fast-enought damages and here you are. In fact, check WoW raids : lots of encounters don't really need the Trinity. Alysrazor in Fireland has fixed aggro mechanism; same for Garalon in Heart of Fear. Ultraxion in DS only need people to press button at the good time, and what about the vehicule fights in Ulduar, the gunship in Icecrown, the Sha in the last Terrace raid etc etc. Usualy tanks have a very small role. As for healers, they are only usefull because there are non-avoidable damages. I'd also like to point that trinity prevents players from being together. What do you prefer to hear : Ultima Online, EVE, Guild Wars 2: "hey, sure: join us and lets have fun together!" or : Trinity based MMORPG: "mmh, sorry: we only need a tank/healer now..." ?
All that is changing now though, what with dual spec or Rift's soul system where you can change to what is needed when you need it. Trinity mechanics don't have to hinder a game anymore as long as devs put in a system where you can change what your role is on the fly. Didn't have any issue getting groups in Rift or GW2, but I do in WoW or EQ/EQ2 when playing pure dps classes.
Loved GW2 system. But I loved Rift's much more. I don't like being locked into a role that is only good in a group centric sense. I liked being able to switch, out of combat, to one of several roles I had built for my character. Rift did it right.
There's trinity and then there's trinity. The difference that affects my enjoyment the most is mob AI and agro mechanics.
WoW gets pretty stale with taunts and high agro generating AOE skills on every tank type. It was kinda fun in TBC when you still had to pay attention to threat meters as DPS and use your agro dumps when needed, but it's at the point now where I hadn't had a threat meter installed in forever when I last played.
DDO does it differently. It's been a long time since I played that one, but the mobs seemed a lot smarter there. Kobolds right in front of the tank aren't going to turn and run past him because they'll get stabbed in the back, other kobolds will run past that pile and try to get to the squishies in the back. This requires players to know their shit. Tanks gotta be in front and block what they can, squishies have to be in the back and throw out stuff like web or sleep to slow and stop the free mobs and rogues and the like hang out in between when needed to intercept and kill the mobs going after your squishies.
Both of these cases have the trinity, but the way the developers chose to work it into the game is vastly different.
Not entirely. I do not want to be waiting in a queue because there are too many healers and tanks and not enough dps or vice versa I've been there done that in the past. That is not the future of mmo's if people think that then build a time machine and keep yourself frozen in 1999.
I'm seeing a little bit of trinity in Neverwinter however, the way they did their system seems to me to be more like STO in that you can have all healer types and still get thru things just fine. It's awesome actually. They didn't put limitations on the scale of abilities. Now how this will effect pvp I'm not sure but we'll see.
I think tho that having healers that can do decent damage and having tanks that do decent damage is a reflection on how Arenanet has influenced the gaming industry and we'll be seeing many many more like it in the future if these developers wish to keep these limitations from affecting the queue times for dungeons if they wish to keep the dungeon system.
gw2's system doesn't make sense when you have several people trying to focus on common enemies. you can defend the game's design all you want, but combat is generally disorganized and not very fun.
classes exist to complement to one another. everquest had a great class system. you had tanks, hybrids that could tank and maybe do a little dps and heal, healers that could debuff, and you had utility classes. to this day, the bard remains one of my favorite classes of all time.
Originally posted by Torvaldr Dedicated tanks with hate and aggro mechanics can go the way of the dodo (rift, wow, lotro, eq2 style tank mechanics). I like healing roles, but I don't like snap aggro/tank mechanics. Support, control, buff, debuff, healing, and damage dealing (st, aoe, dot) all make for more interesting combat.
"passive tanking" isnt that fun....wow added some "active tanking"
but if u guys played tera or even skyrim (same system) 2nd button of the mouse to block! thats where the fun is!
@ eq : the problem in eq was that War , were the tanks on endgame , pallys and SK couldn event dream about tanking anything ....
same goes for heals, druid and shammys were usefull (debuffs/buffs) but couldnt heal the same way CLE did
in eq2 that was fixed, all the healers work different , Clerics reactive heals ,Shaman wards and druid hots.
in the tanking eq2 is meh , guardians were the best in vanilla, now? monks outank everything lol
Originally posted by supertouchme gw2's system doesn't make sense when you have several people trying to focus on common enemies. you can defend the game's design all you want, but combat is generally disorganized and not very fun. classes exist to complement to one another. everquest had a great class system. you had tanks, hybrids that could tank and maybe do a little dps and heal, healers that could debuff, and you had utility classes. to this day, the bard remains one of my favorite classes of all time.
GW2's make perfect sense. Just not if you're trying to treat it like a traditional trinity based game (i.e. tanks keep the mob 'taunt'ed, healers sit back and spam heals, dps sit back and spam rotations). It's much more active than that.
As for aggro, I have a post (i think it's on page 10 of this thread) explaining in detail how the aggro works in GW2. It's amazing how many people still don't know how the game fundamentally operates on certain things. The combat only gets chaotic when you have 5 glass cannons trying to all take on a boss. There is room for more tank-like roles (guardian, elementalist, necro, warrior), just as there are roles for more damage oriented players (warrior, thief, ele, necro, etc. etc.), and roles for more support oriented players (guardian, ele, engineer, mesmer, necro).
Furthermore, more knowledgeable groups know these things, and run dungeons accordingly. Heck, some of the smoothest runs I've ever had were with a guardian up front taking most of the damage & healing, warriros alongside him doing most of the damage, and an ele / mesmer in the back supporting them with heals, utility, cc, and damage.
- It's when players try and go into a fight w/ full berserker gear, and just unload on an enemy expecting the enemy to not react, when things go badly.
The system works, but not if you ignore it completely.
Originally posted by simmihi Yes i definitely like to have a specific role. GW2's praised "no trinity, everyone's welcome" thing just turned into "4 warriors + mesmer" fast runs just a few months past release. The rest of people, with a few exceptions, are just considered sub-par. Rift's class system is perfect, too bad the game is WoW-like at endgame (not enough open world content)
Wait so you're telling me that there's a difference between people finding out the most efficient way of running a dungeon and the holy trinity???
1. 3 warriors and 2 mesmers is a better combo than 4/1
2. The warrior/mes combo is only used in 1 path of 1 dungeon .
3. Every other path of every other dungeon you can have any class combination
4. It's possible to run cof p1 (the war/mes group combo you mention) with any other class combination. It's just fastest with only warriors and mesmers, that's why they're called speed runs...
Please stop spreading disinformation
Originally posted by FelixMajor There has to be a happy medium between having freedom in character building and team play imo. Gw2 is fun, but in group play you just feel like you are all trying to dish out as much dps as possible. In a trinity system, it gets stale fast doing the same thing over and over, but you also get that pride in being good in your role...there has to be a point where those two systems can compliment each other, that would be nice to see
already been done, age of conan 2008
Originally posted by Foreverdream Originally posted by FelixMajor There has to be a happy medium between having freedom in character building and team play imo. Gw2 is fun, but in group play you just feel like you are all trying to dish out as much dps as possible. In a trinity system, it gets stale fast doing the same thing over and over, but you also get that pride in being good in your role...there has to be a point where those two systems can compliment each other, that would be nice to see
I was never a fan of holy trinity. I'm also not a fan of free for all combat as in GW2. I prefer EQ's method. Tanks, Healers, DPS, Buffers, Debuffers, Pullers.
Make more group roles, not less.
Originally posted by Jimmydean I was never a fan of holy trinity. I'm also not a fan of free for all combat as in GW2. I prefer EQ's method. Tanks, Healers, DPS, Buffers, Debuffers, Pullers. Make more group roles, not less.
I remember being a puller in FFXI on my ranger.. was fun and took alot of skill then. WoW had hunters for primarly pulling until wrath then it just turn into tank charges in and shit gets aoe'd killed.
You received 25 Agrees. You're posting some good content. Great!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Now Doesn't That Make You Feel All Warm And Fuzzy? :P
Both have their own charm. The real answer is:
Depends on the game.
It works for GW2, it probably wouldnt work for other games. I can have fun in both types. If I had to pick one or the other I would go with the hybrid system however, as I like that everyone has to work as a team and contribute, rather than relying on two or maybe three roles (tank, healer and sometimes utility like bards or enchanters).
I appreciate that a lot of players like the clutch of having these roles though, which is fine, the point of gaming is fun and not everyone wants the same level of challenge.
Which is why a diversity of types is always going to be better than making all games this or all games that.
I dont really care if a roleplaying game is trinity or not.
But a RPG should have challenge.
And even if a game doesnt explicitly have the trinity, there are always characters that are more resilient than others, and characters that are rather fragile. Thus the sturdier will always try to protect the fragile ones, if they can. Even if there is no aggro mechanism, you often can do that, for example by getting spotted first.
And healing spells, well you can make everybody their own healer, obviously. For example, Diablo 2 did that long ago with healing potions.
Baldurs Gate didnt have the trinity, and yet its gameplay was already a lot like MMOs: send the tanks in first so they gain aggro, then keep healing them with your healers.
Originally posted by Adamantine Baldurs Gate didnt have the trinity, and yet its gameplay was already a lot like MMOs: send the tanks in first so they gain aggro, then keep healing them with your healers.
Which, for a game like with a name like "Warcraft" is just ludicrous, as in "man. that sounds like a terrific way to lose battles".
Not much similarity to WC3, either
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.