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!

POLL: Do you want an aggro managment in EQN?

24567

Comments

  • ChieftanChieftan Independence, MOPosts: 1,417Member
    Definitely needed.

  • GholosGholos GenovaPosts: 209Member
    Originally posted by Ramanadjinn
    Originally posted by Gholos

    I have see some people here that dont want an aggro managment, trinity or a taunt skill in EQN, but no one of them have explain how an alternative system should works and allow a challenging PvE.

    In my game expirience i have seen only 2 possible system:

    1) CLASSIC SYSTEM (trinity with aggro managment) = that allow you to build up parties with classes that have a specific role and are all important for the group due their peculiar skills. A system that promote the collaboration and the coordination between players and need tatics in order to end a PvE  event.

    2) GW2 SYSTEM = that dont need specific roles, where all the classes are supposed to do pratically the same things (healing self and do dps) and where every class can be replaced by another. You have only to think about your char. and to not being killed.

    In my opinion with the GW2 system is nearly imposible to create PvE contet for more than 5 players party because there are no classes's roles...for more than 5 people party i intend real raids not the ridicolous world events of GW2 that are so simple that you can do it semi afk and in auto attack mode (you could do afk if the game have a decent targeting system).

    So, if anyone know an alternative system for PvE, could explain how it can work?

     

    I am one who did not offer an alternative with notes on how to create challenging PVE.

    There are several reasons I did not and will not.  

    For one though, I do not feel the root of why PVE is not challening in most games lies in the aggro mechanic.  I found GW2's PVE extremely easy as I found it in SWTOR, Rift, and WOW.  I could argue PVE is more challenging without the aggro mechanics you enjoy but I will not make the claim as I would imagine the argument will go circular fast.  I feel the root cause of why it is often so easy is predictable, patterned, non-varianced artificial intelligence.

    To elaborate on why I cannot offer an alternative, Artificial Intelligence is a very complex topic which spans horizons far beyond my education and more importantly, the education of many game designers and developers.  The task of creating an artificially intelligent opponent that is at an appropriate challenge level across a spectrum of varied human skill levels, that can stay challenging -- is an old challenge and it is a monumental one.  It is for that reason we don't see it done often, if ever.

     

    About aggro mechanic, i think that is the only one atm that allow challenging pvp cause if you have a tank with aggro control you can allow the other classes to do their jobs ad use their abilities,without a tank, a pure healer couldnt heal efficently cause he could be attacked by many mobs and being killed (the same for a pure dps that will not be ale to do dps on the boss) and if you introduce healers and dps that can survive alone you will have a GW2 system where collaboration between players is not very important. Obviously this is valid for tha tank too that have to rely on the healer to stay alive.

    Furthermore if you dont have specific roles for the classes, boss fights cannot be very complex because you will not have classes suitable to their role, the tank will not enough resilent to resist to boss attacks and take aggro on him, the healer will not able to heals the tank efficently etc. so all will need to become simpler.

    About the second part of your post, i think that it is  interesting, but we are talking about a game that will be released soon so we cannot pretend that it will introduce mobs with artificial intelligence so sofisticated to be similar to a human players, so for a challenging PvE we have to look at a system that works and that is tested in many MMORPG.

    image


    "Brute force not work? It because you not use enought of it"
    -Karg, Ogryn Bone'ead.

  • GholosGholos GenovaPosts: 209Member
    Originally posted by Wolfenpride
    Originally posted by Gholos

    I have see some people here that dont want an aggro managment, trinity or a taunt skill in EQN, but no one of them have explain how an alternative system should works and allow a challenging PvE.

    In my game expirience i have seen only 2 possible system:

    1) CLASSIC SYSTEM (trinity with aggro managment) = that allow you to build up parties with classes that have a specific role and are all important for the group due their peculiar skills. A system that promote the collaboration and the coordination between players and need tatics in order to end a PvE  event.

    2) GW2 SYSTEM = that dont need specific roles, where all the classes are supposed to do pratically the same things (healing self and do dps) and where every class can be replaced by another. You have only to think about your char. and to not being killed.

    In my opinion with the GW2 system is nearly impossible to create PvE contet for more than 5 players party because there are no classes's roles...for more than 5 people party i intend real raids not the ridicolous world events of GW2 that are so simple that you can do it semi afk and in auto attack mode (you could do afk if the game have a decent targeting system).

    So, if anyone know an alternative system for PvE, could explain how it can work?

    Wouldn't Guild wars 1 count as a possible system?

    Having a front/middle/back part setup, and having front line fighters/bunker builds phsyically block or intercept mobs from getting to their squishier team mates?

    I guess the trinity is still loosely there, but it's a slight alternative to the traditional taunting mechanics/tank n' spank.

     

    I dont know, i havent play GW1

    image


    "Brute force not work? It because you not use enought of it"
    -Karg, Ogryn Bone'ead.

  • Gallus85Gallus85 Winter Park, FLPosts: 1,092Member
    Originally posted by Gholos

    I have see some people here that dont want an aggro managment, trinity or a taunt skill in EQN, but no one of them have explain how an alternative system should works and allow a challenging PvE.

    In my game expirience i have seen only 2 possible system:

    1) CLASSIC SYSTEM (trinity with aggro managment) = that allow you to build up parties with classes that have a specific role and are all important for the group due their peculiar skills. A system that promote the collaboration and the coordination between players and need tatics in order to end a PvE  event.

    2) GW2 SYSTEM = that dont need specific roles, where all the classes are supposed to do pratically the same things (healing self and do dps) and where every class can be replaced by another. You have only to think about your char. and to not being killed.

    In my opinion with the GW2 system is nearly impossible to create PvE contet for more than 5 players party because there are no classes's roles...for more than 5 people party i intend real raids not the ridicolous world events of GW2 that are so simple that you can do it semi afk and in auto attack mode (you could do afk if the game have a decent targeting system).

    So, if anyone know an alternative system for PvE, could explain how it can work?

    Let me start by saying I like GW2's system, and I like trinity games, but I'm going to defend GW2 system against the nay sayers because I see a few glaring comments that pretty much prove that they didn't actually understand GW2's PVE system. (Probably through the fault of the game not spelling it out or hand holding players through the process, which is good imo, but with such a different and new system, it wasn't a good idea)

    Here's the thing, the GW2 system is new, hasn't really been done before, and a lot of people didn't understand it.

    There are still roles, and a lot of team coordination going on in GW2.  In fact, many people complained about the dungeons being "too hard", and most of the complaints were due to a lack of understanding of how GW2 handles roles and team coordination.

    The biggest thing that I saw people not understanding was the Field/Finisher mechanic (There are 9 fields and 4 finisher, which makes 36 different combos) .  First thing with group coordination is that you can't activate more than one field at a time with a finisher.  If you drop a water field so that your group can get some heal finishers, and some guy in your group drops a darkness field on top of it.... those heals aren't coming.  Dropping the right fields at the right time, and using the right attacks in those fields at the right time play a huge part in PVE success.

    Now GW2 doesn't have a "Tank" because you can't really manage agro.  You can help give your character a higher chance of being attacked, but between AOEs and other factors, others are going to take damage.  So the roles of the group come down to Support and DPS, but each class/build can "Support" in different ways.

    My guardian for example is really good at providing lots of blast finishers, while other class's support roles might included dropping water fields and casting regens for the group.

    Building a solid group takes a bit of work, and just like holy trinity games, you can't just throw any person in a group and expect to have an easy run at a dungeon.  Not coordinating who's going to drop what fields, who's going to be putting out might/protection, who's going to be doing what finishers, etc, is no different than going into a dungeon in EQ with only wizards and rogues.  It just has a different skin on it.

    Also, the "You have to range a lot of encounters", is a statement that makes clear that the person wasn't taking advantage of different builds / team coordination in GW2.  I have done every single dungeon run in the game, and my team can blow through them extremely fast with no deaths, and my whole team is melee except for my wife, who is a ranger, but she often uses shortbow/axe/warhorn at close range to get +might and other buffs from finishers and to quickly drop a water field when the team needs heals.

    Bottom line is GW2 system works great, for those who understand it.  It's action combat that doesn't allow "Safe" classes.  Everyone fights, pays attention to attacks, and works together.  There is nothing* wrong with holy trinity games.  I enjoy those too, but lets not knock every game that isn't a carbon copy of game mechanics from 15 years ago.

    Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL

  • SabasSabas herzelePosts: 197Member

    If that means I can once again play a character who snares, roots and messes the mobs,

    yes please. 

     

    I don't think its needed to include GW2 into the discussion.

    The lack of an aggro system or trinity isn't the reason GW2 didn't pan out as a lot of us hoped.

     

    Well....maybe a little.

  • Gallus85Gallus85 Winter Park, FLPosts: 1,092Member
    Originally posted by Pandamin

    If that means I can once again play a character who snares, roots and messes the mobs,

    yes please. 

     

    I don't think its needed to include GW2 into the discussion.

    The lack of an aggro system or trinity isn't the reason GW2 didn't pan out as a lot of us hoped.

     

    Well....maybe a little.

    GW2 is one of the most successful MMORPGs to date and the dev team releases additional content (holiday themed and story expansion content) just about every month lol.

    3 million copies sold?  Sold.  Not even F2P 3 million users.  3 million boxes sold at $59.99 to 39.99 a piece.  Not including cash shop sales either.

    Any game company would be lucky to see those kinds of numbers

    Or if you mean't "Didn't pan out" as in some people here didn't like it.  Ok cool.  Gotcha.  Different people like different things.

    Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL

  • SabasSabas herzelePosts: 197Member
    Originally posted by Gallus85
     

    Or if you mean't "Didn't pan out" as in some people here didn't like it.  Ok cool.  Gotcha.  Different people like different things.

    That is what I meant. 

     

    Easy Gallus, no need to champion GW2 with every breath you have. :)

    I have great respect for Anet and I enjoyed GW2 a lot. Hell! its the only MMO in 2 years where I felt I didn't waste my money on buying it. You can look at my post history to see how I feel/felt about GW2.

    Though I have no problems pointing out the areas where I feel they did wrong. FoTM is only 1 example where they lost me as a customer.

    But this thread isn't the place to discuss that. 

  • SomeOldBlokeSomeOldBloke Lancaster, UKPosts: 2,141Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Gholos
    Originally posted by Loke666
    Originally posted by Masterfuzzfuzz
    Gholos i've seen a lot of your posts and I think we are on the same page man. I hated GW2 group combat.

    So you are saying that because you didn't like one none trinity based combat mechanics there can't possibly be any other fun way to handle MMO combat without the trinity?

    Think outside the box, can't you imagine other ways to handle group dynamics than GW2 and EQ/WoW?

    I havent say that you cant imagine a different system than trinity in a MMORPG, i have say that is the only system that work well in my game experience.

    For this reason i dont understand why i have to change a system that works, you can innovate it, giving more possible specs to classes, but not erase it.

    We keep the tired old trinity then you start complaining of a lack of innovation in MMOs. Ditch the Trinity, it's dated and makes finding groups difficult as 80%+ of the population either wants to be a damage dealer or are sick of being blamed for wipes so refuse to be a tank/healer anymore.

  • Gallus85Gallus85 Winter Park, FLPosts: 1,092Member
    Originally posted by Pandamin
    Originally posted by Gallus85
     

    Or if you mean't "Didn't pan out" as in some people here didn't like it.  Ok cool.  Gotcha.  Different people like different things.

    That is what I meant. 

     

    Easy Gallus, no need to champion GW2 with every breath you have. :)

    I have great respect for Anet and I enjoyed GW2 a lot. Hell! its the only MMO in 2 years where I felt I didn't waste my money on buying it. You can look at my post history to see how I feel/felt about GW2.

    Though I have no problems pointing out the areas where I feel they did wrong. FoTM is only 1 example where they lost me as a customer.

    But this thread isn't the place to discuss that. 

    That was me being easy.

    You don't want to see me go hard.

    I only brought it up because people on these forums think everything that didn't get 10+ million users "Didn't pan out".  Which is retarded, to say the least.  But I put in that last part on my post because your wording could have been either way.  I didn't automatically assume you were in the tard camp.

    Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL

  • Gallus85Gallus85 Winter Park, FLPosts: 1,092Member
    Originally posted by mbd1968
    Originally posted by Gholos
    Originally posted by Loke666
    Originally posted by Masterfuzzfuzz
    Gholos i've seen a lot of your posts and I think we are on the same page man. I hated GW2 group combat.

    So you are saying that because you didn't like one none trinity based combat mechanics there can't possibly be any other fun way to handle MMO combat without the trinity?

    Think outside the box, can't you imagine other ways to handle group dynamics than GW2 and EQ/WoW?

    I havent say that you cant imagine a different system than trinity in a MMORPG, i have say that is the only system that work well in my game experience.

    For this reason i dont understand why i have to change a system that works, you can innovate it, giving more possible specs to classes, but not erase it.

    We keep the tired old trinity then you start complaining of a lack of innovation in MMOs. Ditch the Trinity, it's dated and makes finding groups difficult as 80%+ of the population either wants to be a damage dealer or are sick of being blamed for wipes so refuse to be a tank/healer anymore.

    Exactly, complain about a lack of game innovation, then when a game comes out that does innovate like GW2, with a new combat system, it gets flack because you can hang in back pushing 1 2 3 4, standing still semi afk eating a bowl a cereal.

    Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL

  • SabasSabas herzelePosts: 197Member
    Originally posted by Gallus85
     

    That was me being easy.

    You don't want to see me go hard.

    Oh but we can tango if you want!....

     

    Though in the spirit of good manners it would be better suited to take it into PM.

     

    Thank you for not automatically putting me in the "tard" camp? 

    Do me a favour and look up my post history, you would see I'm actually one of the few sensible people on the interwebs.

    That includes avoiding words like tard.

    I always try to use as few words as possible with enough nuance to convey my thoughts. 

     

    And who knows maybe we get to dance in the not so distant future. :)

  • Gallus85Gallus85 Winter Park, FLPosts: 1,092Member
    Originally posted by Pandamin
    Originally posted by Gallus85
     

    That was me being easy.

    You don't want to see me go hard.

    Oh but we can tango if you want!....

     

    Though in the spirit of good manners it would be better suited to take it into PM.

     

    Thank you for not automatically putting me in the "tard" camp? 

    Do me a favour and look up my post history, you would see I'm actually one of the few sensible people on the interwebs.

    That includes avoiding words like tard.

    I always try to use as few words as possible with enough nuance to convey my thoughts. 

     

    And who knows maybe we get to dance in the not so distant future. :)

    I don't know if you want to be my dancing queen.  There are few that could handle this.

    If you want, you can start by addressing my post above about how people didn't understand group make ups, roles and field combos in GW2.  But as you said, you're not a GW2 hater, so you don't have to if you don't want to, bubba.

    Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL

  • SethiusXSethiusX Toronto, ONPosts: 171Member
    Originally posted by Gallus85
    Originally posted by Gholos

    I have see some people here that dont want an aggro managment, trinity or a taunt skill in EQN, but no one of them have explain how an alternative system should works and allow a challenging PvE.

    In my game expirience i have seen only 2 possible system:

    1) CLASSIC SYSTEM (trinity with aggro managment) = that allow you to build up parties with classes that have a specific role and are all important for the group due their peculiar skills. A system that promote the collaboration and the coordination between players and need tatics in order to end a PvE  event.

    2) GW2 SYSTEM = that dont need specific roles, where all the classes are supposed to do pratically the same things (healing self and do dps) and where every class can be replaced by another. You have only to think about your char. and to not being killed.

    In my opinion with the GW2 system is nearly impossible to create PvE contet for more than 5 players party because there are no classes's roles...for more than 5 people party i intend real raids not the ridicolous world events of GW2 that are so simple that you can do it semi afk and in auto attack mode (you could do afk if the game have a decent targeting system).

    So, if anyone know an alternative system for PvE, could explain how it can work?

    Let me start by saying I like GW2's system, and I like trinity games, but I'm going to defend GW2 system against the nay sayers because I see a few glaring comments that pretty much prove that they didn't actually understand GW2's PVE system. (Probably through the fault of the game not spelling it out or hand holding players through the process, which is good imo, but with such a different and new system, it wasn't a good idea)

    Here's the thing, the GW2 system is new, hasn't really been done before, and a lot of people didn't understand it.

    There are still roles, and a lot of team coordination going on in GW2.  In fact, many people complained about the dungeons being "too hard", and most of the complaints were due to a lack of understanding of how GW2 handles roles and team coordination.

    The biggest thing that I saw people not understanding was the Field/Finisher mechanic (There are 9 fields and 4 finisher, which makes 36 different combos) .  First thing with group coordination is that you can't activate more than one field at a time with a finisher.  If you drop a water field so that your group can get some heal finishers, and some guy in your group drops a darkness field on top of it.... those heals aren't coming.  Dropping the right fields at the right time, and using the right attacks in those fields at the right time play a huge part in PVE success.

    Now GW2 doesn't have a "Tank" because you can't really manage agro.  You can help give your character a higher chance of being attacked, but between AOEs and other factors, others are going to take damage.  So the roles of the group come down to Support and DPS, but each class/build can "Support" in different ways.

    My guardian for example is really good at providing lots of blast finishers, while other class's support roles might included dropping water fields and casting regens for the group.

    Building a solid group takes a bit of work, and just like holy trinity games, you can't just throw any person in a group and expect to have an easy run at a dungeon.  Not coordinating who's going to drop what fields, who's going to be putting out might/protection, who's going to be doing what finishers, etc, is no different than going into a dungeon in EQ with only wizards and rogues.  It just has a different skin on it.

    Also, the "You have to range a lot of encounters", is a statement that makes clear that the person wasn't taking advantage of different builds / team coordination in GW2.  I have done every single dungeon run in the game, and my team can blow through them extremely fast with no deaths, and my whole team is melee except for my wife, who is a ranger, but she often uses shortbow/axe/warhorn at close range to get +might and other buffs from finishers and to quickly drop a water field when the team needs heals.

    Bottom line is GW2 system works great, for those who understand it.  It's action combat that doesn't allow "Safe" classes.  Everyone fights, pays attention to attacks, and works together.  There is nothing* wrong with holy trinity games.  I enjoy those too, but lets not knock every game that isn't a carbon copy of game mechanics from 15 years ago.

    Your point about combos being the replacement for the group interaction that normally takes place with the trinity setup is fair I think. And, in theory it should be reasonable. I didn't personally think it worked out that way.

    One problem is that in most cases randomly just doing random stuff in the fields will create a pretty decent result, decent enough for most dungeon encounters. I've done most of the dungeons with a 4 player team (we have a small group of friends that played together and we didn't really like bringing others hence no fifth member), and we got through mostly everything without even thinking about combos, just letting them happen organically. 

    The second problem is that, and this is personal, the combo effects were generally kinda boring in execution, so you didn't really notice them much and so it didn't really feel like you were working together to achieve anything. It felt like more of "Hey there is a random fire field, let me jump into it... did they mean to put it there, who knows?". Give me a big phoenix rising animation that instantly resses someone and has to be planned out when to use it, or a fire elemental spawning that buffs players in an instantly recognizable display that shows that, hey, we created that! I dunno, just something to make them more noticeable than... "he jumped into that field and we all gained a buff that we didn't really notice on us that lasted 12 seconds" effect.

    It basically comes down to even an inexperienced group will have combos occur by chance, and not even notice them or know they created them. So when you do work to make a certain one happen, it still feels a little lackluster, and really downplays the group effort thing. Particularly given that otherwise, you don't need to interact with anyone really in combat.

    This is all my experience and just my opinion, and I do realize that some of the more hardcore players have used combos to a far greater effect. 

  • RedempRedemp Hot Springs, ARPosts: 1,042Member

    Holy Run-On sentence's Batman...

    Voted yes,  this is Everquest.

  • KarbleKarble San Diego, CAPosts: 741Member
    Originally posted by Gholos

    I think that have an aggro managment in EQN is a very important thing cause without it i dont think that the game can have a challenging PvE. The only MMORPG  i have played without this system is GW2, and i really dont like how PvE works there, pratically all the istances are the same, the only thing you have to do is heal yourself, dodge roll, and do dps (all classes) and there is no coordination and strategy between party members, you have only to think to yourself to avoid being killed and do dps; so pratically you cant play a specific role:

    1) you cant play a pure tank: cause without aggro managment and a taunt skill you cant take mobs and bosses on you

    2) you cant play a pure dps: cause without a tank, you can take aggro and if you re a glass cannon you will go downed continously and without a pure healer you cant be healed efficently.

    3) you cant play a pure healer: cause you re supposed to resist and do dps, and cause there is no tank that can help you taking mobs from you.

    The GW2 system, that should give to players freedom to play what they want, give you the possibility to play many spec but 90% of these are totaly useless in PvE, so pratically all classes do the same things in PvE and there isnt a precise distiction between melee and ranged classes too, very often you have to stay ranged even with the stronger warrior or guardian cause if you go melee with certain boss you risk to being ista killed (cause you cant play a pure tank and be healed by pure healer).

    For these reasons i would see in EQN a classic system for the classes, so an aggro managment with a trinity, howether i dont think that have to be a strict system, classes should have more spec possible (so for example you could play a warrior dps) but is fondamental that if you want to play a pure tank or a pure healer this can be possible and usefull for your party.

    I vote: YES

     

    You are 100% correct. Without agro management and agro skills, spells....the game would not be as fun.

    I liked the idea of having to watch what you were doing closely with how you put out heals or damage etc. If you got over the agro table of the tank with summoning mobs, you could get summoned and smacked hard.  It also made agro a useful tool in kiting mobs around for me and a group. I would use a low cost high agro spell and snare and dots while my group sent pets and did melee damage from behind until the huge creature died.....sometimes taking several minutes. But it was this agro management that made this style of play and many many others possible and fun.

  • SabasSabas herzelePosts: 197Member
    Originally posted by Gallus85
     

    I don't know if you want to be my dancing queen.  There are few that could handle this.

     

    Seriously...??

     

    I want to talk about EQnext in the EQnext forum, not GW2.

    Thank you very much.

     

    You are just giving me more reasons to avoid you and going from your posts thats actually what you want.

     

    So be well and best of luck.

  • ZuvielifyZuvielify Fremont, CAPosts: 168Member

    Voted yes

     

    I think people griping over the word "taunt" is just a gripe over semantics. What if the ability was a mental-magic attack that forced the mob to turn towards the tank? All better. Now it's not "insults", but "magic".

     

    There are many ways to do an agro management system that could be considered "realistic" in a fantasy setting. For example, maybe all classes get a de-agro ability that is on a short cooldown. Unfortunately, that would still be chaos because de-agroing a mob from yourself doesn't mean it goes back to the tank.

    Instead, maybe certain classes have various ways of tricking a mob to fight a certain target (tank). Like, maybe the attack appears to come from the tank, so his agro builds more. For example, a wizard has a type of fireball that emanates from the tank, and gives the tank the agro, or a rogue's sneak attack is actually that: an attack that makes the mob think it came from someone else.

     

    The problem with not having tanks is that everyone has to become more of a generalist. I've always liked the wide selection of specialized classes that EQ2 had. If everyone can heal, and everyone can cc, and everyone can tank, where is the excitement in the combat? In my opinion, there is none.

  • SabasSabas herzelePosts: 197Member
    Originally posted by Karble
     

     But it was this agro management that made this style of play and many many others possible and fun.

     

    I'm going to agree with that, crowd control is something that has been lacking in pretty much all of the "2nd generation"  MMO's.

     

    Though I don't want to get thrown back into a system where I need to watch agro meters.

    I want all of that information by looking at the battle and not some artificial counter.

    Watching cast bars isn't really that fun, IMO.

     

     

  • Gallus85Gallus85 Winter Park, FLPosts: 1,092Member
    Originally posted by SethiusX

    Fair observations, but your basing a lot of what you say on anecdotal evidence (Your team did fine with little work).  This can be explained by chance (just how you guys each decided to spec happened to fall into the right roles or were using the good fields just by chance).

    In a PUG group, you have a chance of getting all glass cannons, or a buncha of non-complementary players.  The dungeon would result in lots of downs and wipes and people would get frustrated and run to the forums, complaining about the dungeon being too hard.  Your team may have had little problems, but it was clear from the outcry on the GW2 forums that many people did in fact not understand the game mechanics and it did cause problems for them.

    Your group was probably not all glass cannons and were performing the roles and playing correctly, just by accident or a little instinct.

    As for not having a large effect that you would notice, I can see that reasoning.

    However, when my group is all down under 25% hps, and my wife drops a water field, I do 2 blast finishers into the water field, pop my group heal, swap to my staff and use empowerment (heal / might AOE), and everyone is back to full health, people tend to notice that quite a lot.

    Same with doing 3x blast finishers in fire + empowerment.  When people have max +25 might buff and the DPSers are pulling a lot bigger numbers, they notice that.

    I agree some effects weren't as noticeable though.

    But core argument still remains.  GW2 required roles and coordination on top of requiring everyone to fight, dodge and have a foot in combat.  People simply didn't understand what was going on and many cases they suffered for it.

    I do like having more rigid roles, it's novel and reminiscent of fun times in original EQ.  But I feel that we're going to be moving away from that kind of combat.  It's just not cinematic.  It's not realistic.  Realistic combat is where everyone is a part of the fight.  Not just 1 person "taunting" and 5 other people laying into the monster that is somehow oblivious to the rest of the team.

     

    Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL

  • Gallus85Gallus85 Winter Park, FLPosts: 1,092Member
    Originally posted by Pandamin
    Originally posted by Gallus85
     

    I don't know if you want to be my dancing queen.  There are few that could handle this.

     

    Seriously...??

     

    I want to talk about EQnext in the EQnext forum, not GW2.

    Thank you very much.

     

    You are just giving me more reasons to avoid you and going from your posts thats actually what you want.

     

    So be well and best of luck.

    Seriously, I was just picking on you.

    And comparing and contrasting mechanics and features of other games to future games is common sense.  That's how the gaming industry moves forward.  We don't reinvent the wheel every time for every mechanic in every game.  We build on top of what previous programmers, artists and designers have done in the past.  Keep what works, fix what doesn't and improve on what we can.

    Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL

  • SabasSabas herzelePosts: 197Member
    Originally posted by Gallus85
    Keep what works, fix what doesn't and improve on what we can.

    See if you talk like a normal person I have no problem going into it.

     

    Yes comparisons are good but you were not merely comparing.....lets leave it at that.

    And GW2 did not remove the trinity....it only removed the agro system. See? There is no reason to be so confrontational with me. We are not on opposing teams, I already feel yukkie :) for even typing this. Because there was no need to drag this out.

     

    Still I feel crowd control is what has been lacking severely.

    If CC is added once again as a class on its own, its also no longer a trinity is it?...

     

    edit: remove is perhaps the wrong word, GW2 didn't use the classic spank/tank agro system. Hate, is perhaps a better word for it.

  • Gallus85Gallus85 Winter Park, FLPosts: 1,092Member
    Originally posted by Pandamin
    Originally posted by Gallus85
    Keep what works, fix what doesn't and improve on what we can.

    See if you talk like a normal person I have no problem going into it.

     

    Yes comparisons are good but you were not merely comparing.....lets leave it at that.

    And GW2 did not remove the trinity....it only removed the agro system. See? There is no reason to be so confrontational with me. We are not on opposing teams, I already feel yukkie :) for even typing this. Because there was no need to drag this out.

     

    Still I feel crowd control is what has been lacking severely.

    If CC is added once again as a class on its own, its also no longer a trinity is it?...

     

    I was comparing.  The two systems are variations of the same thing, performed in a different way.

    I wasn't being confrontational with you.  You misread my comments and took offense where none was given.

    I didn't drag anything down.  I'm talking about games and how they went about specific mechanics.

    CC is lacking in many games.  CC needs to be done right though.  In a more action pack and frantic way.  EQ's CC was too neat and tidy (but good for it's time).  I want to see CC take a more active combat role, keep the pressure off the group, but having to be extremely active and reactive to do so.  Pushing, stunning, lifting, confusing, all short duration skills that require the CC class to juggle, manage and interrupt monsters.  Not casting one "mez" and having the mob stand there for 2 minutes drooling on itself.

     

    Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL

  • DullahanDullahan Posts: 2,057Member Uncommon
    Aggro management is a no-brainer.  A system without it is just a bad system.


  • SabasSabas herzelePosts: 197Member
    Originally posted by Gallus85
    I want to see CC take a more active combat role, keep the pressure off the group, but having to be extremely active and reactive to do so.

     

    OK sure, np.

    I took offense with all the tough talking yes, as I said I'm a sensible person I just don't want to waste my time on senseless keyboard fighting. So enough already, *shakes hand*

     

    Oh yea I totally agree that the CC needs to be updated into a slightly more action packed combat system.

    EQ was indeed very tidy but I think that had more to do with the dial up internet we had back then. 

    How would CC become a more action packed experience.....

    Perhaps CC would only be aplied after performing  a succesful combo? 

     

    I'm assuming EQnext will have more action oriented combat...they did say they wanted to improve on the tropes and then add ontop of that. I really hope the combat will be more then what we have been playing for 15 years.

  • wizardanimwizardanim Apple Valley, CAPosts: 278Member
    Originally posted by Redemp

    Holy Run-On sentence's Batman...

    Voted yes,  this is Everquest.

    Yes, this is Everquest.  But it concerns me that the devs feel it necessary to say things like:

    (paraphrased): "We are changing so many things - we can't release anything until August 2nd because we want a chance to explain our shenanigans.  Note: we might release this in the 5 months following SOE live.".

    I want to see the classic system (my concern is that they changed it too much) , but I also want to see new systems that compliment the old and might shock me a bit - or better yet, let me have some input into the combat system, where applicable.  I voted yes.

Sign In or Register to comment.