It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Originally posted by colddog04 Originally posted by Yamota Originally posted by colddog04 Originally posted by Yamota Originally posted by Damage99 Better yet all MMO's should just have 1 class that everyone plays and is exactly the same that way you dont need to depend on anyone else in the MULTIPLAYER world. Great plan.
Yeah, and while we are at it. Let's just have one type of weapon and armor as well.
How far will this dumbing down of MMOs go?
In my opinion, specifically in PvE, the trinity is the most dumbed down that MMO combat can get. I still like playing healers, but I'm not oblivious to the idea that my role is far less complicated and interesting in WoW than it is in a game like GW2 where I often play a support heavy elementalist.
Ok guys, we all have 1 role. You make sure you keep agro. You make sure you do dps. You make sure you heal. Every once min a while, move to the side when there is a telegraphed move.
Having your role decided by the devs is as dumbed down as it gets. I think part of the reason that people hate other systems outside of the trinity so much is because they like being assigned a single task instead of many. It's easier on their brains.
Explain to me how having three roles is more dumbed down than having only two (dmg and support). Contrary to popular belief, trinity based games can, and frequently do, have hybrid classes which can do more than one thing. Off-tanks can also DPS. Secondary healers can often either CC or DPS and so on.
Explain to me why you think the number of developer defined roles is the determining factor when considering whether or not the gameplay is dumbed down. If anything, you can say that GW2 does not have any defined roles at all and has an infinite amount of roles. That is a lot more than 3.
Maybe I missed it, but I was not aware that this discussion was about GW 2. In any case, you are contradicting yourself. One one hand you want me to explain why having more roles in combat is a determining factor, something I did not claim but I do think it is a factor.
However on the other hand you seems to be implying that having many roles, such as what you claim GW 2 has, is not dumbed down.
Originally posted by Yamota Originally posted by colddog04 Originally posted by Yamota Originally posted by colddog04 Originally posted by Yamota Originally posted by Damage99 Better yet all MMO's should just have 1 class that everyone plays and is exactly the same that way you dont need to depend on anyone else in the MULTIPLAYER world. Great plan.
GW2 is a point of reference. How many games do you know of that are popular enough to have a discussion about lack of trinity? GW2 is the perfect candidate for such a discussion since it is one of the few games that doesn't have clearly defined roles. Why would we not use GW2 to discuss this? It's also why I use WoW. It is one of the biggest PvE trinity games.
If we use your example for number of roles deciding how "dumbed down" a combat system is, then a game like GW2 is less dumbed down than one with 3 roles because there is no limit to the role combinations you can use and play with effectively. Your logical conclusion started with a faulty premise which was that GW2 has only 2 roles.
I am of the opinion that the PvE experience in GW2 tends to be much more complex than anything I've experienced in WoW. The teamwork and consistency in an average dungeon experience offers more varied playstyles than anything WoW has to offer.
However, I think that the raid encounter design in WoW is pretty damn good. One of the reasons I think this is true is because they can work within the confines of such a limited combat system.
Originally posted by Dogblaster I am not playing ANY mmorg that has no trinity ... again. trinity is way to superior, fun and best just to ignore it ... everyone dps? everyone self healer? nah thank you. rpgs were always about roles
This. I'm still a fan of the trinity. The only time I don't care about the trinity's existence? PVP.
Originally posted by Thresh GW2 has done away with the trinity. Look at its group PvE combat - pisspoor at best. Bunch of people chaotically rolling around to avoid damage.
GW2 PvE makes me think of this.
2 words for you,
City of Heroes.
It did it so well its crazy that no developers tried to copy it.
You could have a tank and healer like you could have none of those but have CC, you could have a tank and CC without a healer, you could have a healer and CC without a tank and still be successful, the list goes on.
I'm still ******* mad that they took it down. sigh
let's remove the dps class first though.
Originally posted by Hatefull Originally posted by Loktofeit Originally posted by Dogblaster I am not playing ANY mmorg that has no trinity ... again. trinity is way to superior, fun and best just to ignore it ... everyone dps? everyone self healer? nah thank you. rpgs were always about roles
If a person never tried PvP at all and never experienced PvE outside of EQ/WOW mechanics, I can easily see them thinking the way you do.
I have played every game you mention and I tend to disagree with you...and your evident elitism. Ignoring the second part of my statement I disagree with you completely about EVE. They use stealth bombers (rogues), carriers (support/cc) I can't remember the bigger boats (been awhile and I have TBI, so meh) but they most definitely build for tanking and pure damage. So in that regard, you are full of crap at the least.
The trinity works for people that like working as a team to accomplish something. The big issue I see is trying to make one toon or type of toon that can both PvE and PvP equally well. To my way of thinking, a tank has really no place in PvP. They are the last toon targeted and for good reason, they generally do crap damage.
Basically, leave PvE with the trinity, and figure out something else for PvP. This is coming from a guy that plays PvE/PvP PC, consoles, PnP you name it I game it.
I don't hate on innovation, but lets not remove the roles and team from RPG games please.
Stop being defensive about someone possibly slighting your favorite video game strategies because it has you reading things into people's posts that simply aren't there.
He states that the trinity is superior and it's best just to ignore any game that doesn't have it... and then call me elitist? Is it really elitist to call out the tank role for what it is - a cheap workaround?
You then go into completely confusing support/offense/defense with what we are talking about in this discussion which is the TANK, a character class that exists solely to function within the aggro/threat system. So, instead of wasting your time typing out insults and calling me full of crap, read up a bit on the topic you chose to discuss and understand it a bit better.
You say you're a PnP gamer, so then you're probably aware that tanks did not exist in PnP. Why? Because it's a ridiculous role. In PnP games you have position and distance in a format that simply didn't translate well to MUDs and MMOs, especially with the all too common lack of CD and the introduction of the many new variables introduced as a result of moving to a digital medium.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Originally posted by Loktofeit Originally posted by Hatefull Originally posted by Loktofeit Originally posted by Dogblaster I am not playing ANY mmorg that has no trinity ... again. trinity is way to superior, fun and best just to ignore it ... everyone dps? everyone self healer? nah thank you. rpgs were always about roles
Stop being defensive about someone possibly slighting your favorite video game strategies because it has you reading things into people's posts that simply aren't there.
I'm with Loktofeit 100%. Tank only exists to manipulate aggro or to exploit under-developed AI. Hence, there are no tanks in PnP games or PvP, where you are playing against a human opponent.
Teamwork and cooperation does not rely on the tank - on any single role. Any game with any amount of specialization and decent balance will have roles people can fulfill. If you doubt this, you need to play more games. The tank is not mandatory - neither is the healer.
I am sad to see so many people engrained in the trinity to realize this.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Originally posted by Hawkspeed 2 words for you, City of Heroes. It did it so well its crazy that no developers tried to copy it. You could have a tank and healer like you could have none of those but have CC, you could have a tank and CC without a healer, you could have a healer and CC without a tank and still be successful, the list goes on. I'm still ******* mad that they took it down. sigh
The biggest reason for this was a maximum group size of eight. With a group size of 5 your locked into tank, 3 dps, heals.
I have been in many City of Heroes groups seeing groups with multiple tanks or healers or even just support or dps it was awesome grouping in that game. Taking out the trinity, having less classes or choices, no specialization, no player selection, no customization, or limiting or removing things shouldn't be the goal. Not in any game I would want to play anyway.
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldonLove Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Originally posted by ZoeMcCloskey Originally posted by asrlohz Originally posted by TheScavenger Originally posted by Damage99 Better yet all MMO's should just have 1 class that everyone plays and is exactly the same that way you dont need to depend on anyone else in the MULTIPLAYER world. Great plan.
I agree with you. This would be the perfect compromise in terms of balance. This would make PvP far better, and no one would worry about one class being overpowered by 1 dps or underpowered by 1 dps.
...I don't think he was being serious, mate.
Also, there is something called "Perfect Imbalance" (or Imperfect Balance). For example, look at league of legends and you'll notice that sometimes one extremely OP champion is released. And there is no argument against it. The champion is just over the top OP. At this moment people are forced to switch tactics against this opponent by playing champions that before were really unpopular but turned out to have a great kit against this new OP threat. This is what makes it all so intriguing.
Much like in MMO's how spellcasters hit really heavy and might have great CC and escape mechanisms, a well placed rogue could take that threat out of the picture because the spellcaster was not ready for that. However that wouldn't work too well against a tank in most cases.
The reason I keep playing LOL and find it so fun is the paper-rock-scissors-endlessly of it all. So many random outcomes for party composition and how those parties play out against each other. I have gotten better at predicting which team will "win" based on the 5v5 but am still very often surprised when the outcome goes completely against what I expect.
On the subject at hand. People grr about the holy trinity and all that but it does bring a sense of being "needed" for what you bring to the table. That said I do like GW2 and still have been playing it but ironically given the subject of this, I like to be a tank most of all. In GW2 it is fairly hard to be in any way a reliable tank in any traditional sense. The closest I come to it is with my Necromancer built to be a brick wall.
Eh I think the holy trinity is here to stay in one form or another, at least until some game company hires me to setup a system for them.
I agree. Gw2's example was dreadful. But in LoL it has kind of a holy trinity as well, except that it consists of a dozen subclasses that can fill out the roll as "tank" as well. You can be a full on damage Shen and still be effective. And you can play Annie as a tank and not ruin the game for the whole team.
The more choices we implement, the more complex it becomes and the higher learning curve it requires... except in MMO's! Because you can pick a class and stick to it in MMO's. So instead of like in LoL having to adjust to the team, you would adjust your team after yourself. You'd find mates that would really fit your playstyle instead of mates who just know what button to push at what time. Yet you would be viable with any group in a worse case scenario. The holy trinity should have room to expand into more subclasses in my opinion.
Originally posted by Gorwe Let's innovate the horribly stale Dungeon/Raid mechanics first. As long as the whole point of it is DEEPS! there will be no innovation. Also, a better AI would be nice, but not necessary. Then, let's stop thinking in the totally flawed way. "There are only dungeons, raids and PvP". NOPE! The WHOLE MMO must be interesting or zog it! That's what sets apart the Great products from the rest. It's difficult to surpass Rambo movies when it comes to action(or Terminator movies for that matter). The same is with Mario games(100% fun) or TES games(100% fun). Why is it that only in MMOs(well most of them) you have to wait until the very end to have fun??? This needs to change. But it's not so easy. Paradigms don't shift over night. And it will take time. Also, I would like to join the club that says bring more variety. CC/Buff/Debuff/summon/Tank/tanky DPS/DPS/tanky Healer/Healer/healy DPS/... are just some of examples of what should be. That way tanks/healers won't be the kings of this parade
Introducing a "tanky healer" or anything of the sort is just dancing around the issue. Some people are tired of the trinity that is present in nearly every single MMORPG out there. You can have additional roles, and many games do, but the trinity (tank, healer, dps) is always the core of combat dynamics.
As long as players can manipulate or exploit AI behavior, there will be tanks. It is immensely powerful - I would say it is cheating if I didn't know it was the metagame the developers intended. Many think trinity makes combat trivial and formulaic and I am among them.
The whole system is perverse and overused. Some people are so used to it they don't see any alternatives and suffer great discomfort when moved out of the only thing they know. Trinity is safe, simple and easy. It is no wonder why they see other combat systems as "mindless zerg". They want their easy-mode combat.
I suspect the recent outcry against trinity comes from the fact that manipulating aggro seems to be becoming more and more prevalent atleast in MMORPGs, SRPGs and many games with RPG influence.
The trinity affects many things in a game - class, ability, map and encounter design. Many RPGs have weak CC and buffed enemies, which force tactics more towards outlasting your enemy than anything else. Too often, taunt/aggro manipulation is the only truly powerful form of CC.
Ofcourse you don't just take a regular MMORPG with trinity and just remove tanks and healers! You have to build the game around the idea that players will not be manipulating aggro and they cannot rely on healers alone for their defense.
Arenanet tooko a step in the right direction with GW2, although we can debate all night how well they achieved their goals in the end. They didn't include aggro manipulation (which they didn't have in GW1 either), they introduced a lot of CC and they severely reduced healing to promote other methods of defense.
But, no... Sadly some people just don't want to think, adapt and improvise in combat. They just want to do their one thing and expect all will go well; combat for dummies.
Originally posted by Robokapp let's remove the dps class first though.
And after, also the utility/support classes. Its just not OK to have someone who cannot tank, dps and heal as well as others, just because they focus more on support.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
Originally posted by Gorwe Don't take my post wrong. I too think that GW 2 did the step in the right direction. However, I think that the realisation of that in GW 2 is sorta subpar. I view Tank/DPS/Healer as the three axis of MMOs. You can be placed only on Y-axis, but that means that you are at flat zero on the other two. We can link this to being full DPS in an MMO. I HIGHLY dislike pure classes(those that can do just one thing), but I dislike jack-of-all-trades as well(33-33-33). What I Like are the hybrids(tanky dps etc). You can get really creative with those. For example tanky dps is 40-60(Defense-DPS) and dps tank is 60-40(Defense-DPS). DPSy CC Tank would be 60-20-20(Defense-DPS-CC). As you can see, the possibilities are endless. Tho, let's be real. Even in full open systems(think TSW/GW 1), people are going to find the optimal builds and, yes, they are going to abuse them. It all comes down to the how ridiculous MMOs have become. When you write a sentence, all of it should be important(and yes, that encompasses interpunction signs, gaps and end signs). In MMOs you can argue about the importance of each segment, but to what it all boils down: ENDgame. Yeah, in MMO sentence the most important part is the dot(or period). To put into perspective: you spend two minutes writing a sentence then you spend five minutes writing a dot. That doesn't sound too natural, now does it? And that's our biggest and only problem. The source of all misdesigned stuff.
Your view becomes obnoxious when applied to MMORPGs with modern technology. A tank with a sword in a game with machine guns looks awkward because we know what machine guns can do in real life. It strikes too close to home and it is a prime example to show how perverse the system really is.
It is really not a matter of open or closed system, classes or no classes. TSW had tanks, because mob aggro could be manipulated. I am very disappointed when modern combat gets comformed and simplified to the trinity mold. In recent memory such games include SWTOR and TSW. Not too long a go, Eve Online's poor mob AI allowed people to apply trinity to PvE. Luckily not anymore.
Roles are born out of the game mechanics. In a game where a guy really dies when shot in the face with a shotgun, you will never ever have tanks. Same thing when you take away aggro manipulation. In PnP D&D, ranged healing was extremely rare. As a result healing in combat was reserved for emergencies only, because it made clerics fairly vulnerable.
There are plenty of roles created through game modes too. These include, flag runners, infiltrators, area capturers and area defenders etc. Roles can be created through methods of applying damage or defense. GW1 saw heavy use of not only healing monks, but protection monks (healing being reactive defense and protection proactive defense) alongside many varying supporting roles for defense. Also, there is usually a multitude of ways of applying damage and, lets not forget, varying CC can be used both offensively and defensively.
Thinking through your three axis (ultimately based on the trinity) is limiting yourself. If people are unhappy with the trinity, anything you do to the trinity will merely be a band-aid: be that creating hybrids or "spicing up" any one role within the trinity. If you want to look for solutions, look outside the trinity not within the trinity. There is plenty of inspiration to draw from.
Naturally, there will always be those who will only stick to what they know, but all this "Hurr durr, is combat a mindless zerg without a tank/healer" is just ignorant nonsense. I'm not blaming you for making such comments, but we both know there are plenty of posters even in this thread guilty of this.
If you ask me the real problem is the flawed aggro mechanic. It’s a system from the old days of mmos, when we had Pentium 1 computers and dial up modems. At its core the whole tank-healer thing is noting but exploiting this old imperfect mechanic. If it would be introduced to today it would most likely be called bug-using.
If you think about it, what exactly is the tank doing to hold aggro? It is never really explained. Is he jumping up and down in front of the dragon, shouting “Hey Dragon, your mother is so fat she can’t even fly…”?
Unless the tank is capable of mind control, I don’t know how this should ever work. A really dump creature like a zombie would just attack the nearest opponent, an animal like a wolf would always attack the one in the group that looks the weakest, not the big intimidating guy, and a human would know even better to go for the guy in robes first.
If you ask me, a tank should rather be something like a bodyguard that can stand next to another group member to protect it.
I think guild wars 2 is rather suffering from having to few tanky classes. Everyone is just a damage dealer, except the guardian.
I think there is nothing wrong with a character that has more protective skills then offensive ones, if he can’t force everyone to attack just him. Also, a tank without a healer is very ineffective. He can absorb damage until his hp go down, and then what?
The healing on the other hand is handled really well in gw2, mostly relying on self heals and aoe heals. As you know, playing a dedicated healer is not much fun and the whole group relies on him.
Originally posted by TheScavenger Originally posted by Damage99 Better yet all MMO's should just have 1 class that everyone plays and is exactly the same that way you dont need to depend on anyone else in the MULTIPLAYER world. Great plan.
Let's all try to remember that RPGs were not meant to be balanced in the first place.
Let's all try to remember what RPG stands for: Role Playing Game. This means Roles to play. Strong, weak, fast, slow, productive, destructive, defensive, offensive, passive ROLES to play.
Let's all try to remember why it matters at all to improve one's gear, level, ability/skill, experience -- to be stronger and have an edge.
Let's all try to remember that balanced, equal pvp already exists and comes in the form of other types of games, such as FPS, RTS, Fighting, Racing, Puzzles, etc.
MMORPGs are not supposed to be a medium in which all players involved are equal and balanced, because there is an entire world to take into account. Multiple goals and objectives in which one class/role's strength is beneficial, while not as beneficial in other situations. This is flavor, and this is what separates the genre and drew in the intrigued in the first place.
Originally posted by gimmesome Originally posted by TheScavenger Originally posted by Damage99 Better yet all MMO's should just have 1 class that everyone plays and is exactly the same that way you dont need to depend on anyone else in the MULTIPLAYER world. Great plan.
And it changed. Players don't want to be second best.
Just look at all the DPS balancing hoopla in WOW. If DPS is not within 1%, people are QQing about the end of their spec.
I have to totally disagree with Loktofeit once again....
there is a reason the tank role exist. It's a form of mob control. Otherwise the PvE would have to be designed around zergs and red circles.
Also trinity has nothing to do with Dumb AI like people believe. The trinity also exist in PvP as well. Ever play Rift's PvP as a level 50 in vanilla Rift? Warrior class, aka the tanks were intimidating and tough as nails in PvP. They easily draw attention of enemy, especially if healers and buffers are doing their role and keeping the Tank up and strong. Trinity right there. In PvP, I consider Melee classes as the tank, and ranged damage dealers as DPS, and healers as healers. Melee tend to draw players attention, like healers also do. Ranged DPS seem to be the last on the hate/threat list of enemy players. Same concept as PvE in vanilla WoW.
tanks and healers held top threat/hate in PvE in vanilla WoW, just how PvP trinity in Rift was.
Originally posted by austriacus Originally posted by Dogblaster Originally posted by Thresh GW2 has done away with the trinity. Look at its group PvE combat - pisspoor at best. Bunch of people chaotically rolling around to avoid damage.
maan +1 .. couldnt say it better
Dps is boring and dungeon with bunch of dps rolling all over the place, jumping into the wall and trying to outdace boss with it is something i dont want to be part of ...
I get it, you are just angry that there are more important role than your dps .. but man, get over it
This is exactly the problem with the system. Roles by themeselves shouldnt make one more important than the other, it should be the player himself. Thats why GW2 is such a fantastic pve game, you are set apart by actual skill and not a role.
I just think that people who say this kinda stuff are selfish players. Why should a player be punsihed by liking dps style gameplay?
In a good trinity, no role is more important then another. If the tank doesn't tank, everyone dies. If the healer doesn't heal, everyone dies. If the dps doesn't kill things fast enough, it taxes the healer who now can't heal the tank.. everyone dies. You are always gonna have shitty selfish players, trinity or no. I'm sure plenty of em ruin groups in Gw2 same as a trinity game.
I really don't get people saying that Tanks have no role in PvP. If they are properly implemented they serve the same purpose as they do in PvE - soaking up damage and keeping other players alive longer.
Another reason I like games like TOR where there is a Guard ability.. Or any game with an ability that lets me as a Tank, with a shit ton of HP absorb damage to other classes to keep them alive. This forces players to target you as a tank, as you make it harder to kill the healers, casters, etc. It's all the better if taunt abilities work in PvP also as it would disrupt targeting and give you even more purpose.