Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
A small problem with action combat . It kills raiding.
Kiyoris
Member RarePosts: 2,130
Ok, so the major problem people have with action combat is that it tends to result in zerg combat, it doesn't help grouping.
Ok, I have another problem with it....surprise....anyway
The problem is........that is destroys viable raiding.........trinity systems created dependency.
The EQNext designer himself said you can keep going if you lose all your healers, it doesn't matter.
Well, in EQ you need those people to be online. All guilds revolve around RA (raid attendance), the whole game is a well oiled raid machine of non-stop unadulterated no-life raid madness, awesomecake!
With action combat, people don't care, they log on whenever they want, it's a zergfest anyway, so who cares if class A or B is missing, who even cares who we recruit, they're all multiclass anyway....ZEEERG FACEROLL
My argument is, action combat creates a failcakes game for raiders!
Comments
Yes, this is one of the main reasons me and my guys lost interest in GW2 shortly after finally getting inside the first few instances. (Damn bug prevented people joining the same instance for several days) We realized there there is no sense of teamwork involved. Everyone is doing their own thing.
In short, we lost interest after that extremely quickly.
I'm not convinced...
Tweet at me - Visit my website
if nothing else, EQ was known for bringing raiding to mmos
Georgeson said there are large scale encounters but its unclear on how large
EQ2 fan sites
At the same time, I'd kind of say that not every game has to be raid-centric, any more than it has to be pvp centered.
This game seems to be about creating a big, open world of emergent gameplay. To me, that doesn't seem like a good fit for raiding anyway, which relies on vertical progression and mastering the timing and strategies of static encounters.
Games are allowed to be different things, maybe this one won't give you the raiding experience you want?
I like a lot what GW2, but they too left out flavor in in combat.. Even WoW / Rift and others did as well.. There is more to mob encounters then just the holy trinity.. I don't mind that raids have a CHANCE of success if the tanks or healers die.. BUT they should of kept in the important roles of healing, kiting, CCing and whatnot as the added bonus to strategy.. I do agree this new action combat that GW2 does and it appears that EQN is going to do really homogenizes the fight into a group hack and slash, nothing more..
Well, it could be like Vanguard, where there are overland bosses, like Tharrion (is that the spelling?) and anyone can come together to take down the boss. Zerg may not be the only viable choice, if everyone can co-ordinate well as a team/guild.
The possibility of the universe collapsing into a singularity is higher than the birth of a perfect MMORPG.
Don't think it's the action combat itself that will make raids as we know it impossible. It's indeed that trinity, that will make it very hard to design something challenging. All the EQN team has said about this when asked, is: "We have a lot of experience, so we will do what we can to make a meaningful game for everyone"
But if a tank can not tank, why does a raid leader even want to have a tank in their ranks, when he could just as well add another flavour of the month top dps guy? Why have a healer when you can do without heals, just add another dps and we get even faster to the phat loot, yay for us!
I'm cynical, very cynical, but nevertheless I hope they will give us a game better than I currently think it will be.
True.. so a group of 6 could take it down? We just don't know.. but I doubt there are any 30 person fights planned.. LOL
Did they say that when healers die it doesnt matter becuase heals are not needed? Because a class has a limited active abilities it seems... which therefore suggests that a choice in class role has to be made... meaning the trinity exists if there is healing, if there is tanking, if there are other roles.
The trinity does not exist if the content is so easy you dont need healers, or even tanks... just dps to finish the job quicker.
They never said that.
Not sure you are right about your assumption.
Also action combat has nothing to do with trinity. They are two exclusive things OP.
Please do not spread misinformation, beucase that is what it seems you are doing. Since you are not asking, but stating something that sounds wrong by stating not only does the trinity system not exist, but it does not exist becuase the combat is action oriented...
edit: As far as i know for character abilties.. there is movement, offensive, defensive, and utility. The defensive and utility can be categorized as 'healing' classes. So the trinity does exist.
Write bad things that are done to you in sand, but write the good things that happen to you on a piece of marble
There's a video currently on curse.com where they basically confirm they got rid of the trinity, although they didn't use the word trinity. But "our AI is too smart to keep attacking the same guy during the whole fight" means tanking won't be possible. And healers aren't needed is an exact phrase they used.
Basically they want the game so noone in a guild has to depend on anyone in particular. If the top healer in a guild decides not to log on the raid can still continue. That's their design choice.
edit: here's the curse video, part 2 in the sidebar, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOKhfxwLokg
Just play GW2 to see what Scalable public events are.
And for difficult champion bosses, you do need a lot of people. I've ran across some events that probably had close to 100 people participating in Orr. But without a trinity it's a bit chaotic. You can't structure combat, it becomes a game of every man for himself, you stay out of the fire and hit things when you can.
I do hope EQN doesn't punish melee as much as GW2 does. Nothing worse than seeing most of the ground within 2 dodge rolls covered in red circles. Unavoidable death = dumb.
I'm well familiar with GW2.. I was just saying with the 30 man number, is that it's the MINIMUM needed to defeat the boss.. Even GW2 doesn't go that demanding.. All the boss fights I've been in ranged from 15 to 30 at most.. I have yet to be in one over 40 people..
I realized I might be wrong in my assumption that the trinity exists... but I still find it too early to tell that there is no healing or tanking as meaning that there are no tanks, or no damage mitigation.
It just means there are no taunts for tanks, and for utility classes there are not save the day buttons but rather something more situational like a debuff. Thus the trinity does exist but not in the traditional sense, and I did not see the video, but yea, those are their words... so I dont want to go against what they are saying... but a tank, and a utility class sounds like a trnity system that is more complicated with more movement and kiting than the traditional sense.
I could be wrong, but I think its still to early to take thier words and exaggerate our opinions using certain labels. Since by saying there is no trinity, it suggests that there are no class roles.
It becomes an argument of semantics. And I do not want to take what they are saying the wrong way, but saying there is no trinity is a loaded term, and I beleive the OP is encouraging a certain perception that may be farther than the truth... even though the devs used that themselves... but its mostly becuase it is loaded terminology.
So if there are class roles, then a certain kind of trinity system does exist. Possibly?
Write bad things that are done to you in sand, but write the good things that happen to you on a piece of marble
ArenaNet is working on something like raiding already, it's not going to be normal mmorpg raiding but they have said there will be something similar to raiding. Let's see what it is before judging raiding doesn't work with action combat.
I'm pretty sure the raiding in GW2 will be very large scale and many objectives. Like revamping the Zhaitan fight so it becomes more epic and not firing cannons for 10 minutes. A ground battle that goes on for atleast 10-15 minutes, then some more fight on a ship with different objectives to complete.
I'm all for innovation and breaking the theme-park mold that has dominated the genre for the last ten years. I want a good sandbox as much as the next guy, but I share in the concerns expressed by many here. SOE seems to be making questionable choices when it comes to combat and the lack of raiding.
I like to raid. I suspect a whole lot of other MMO fans also like to raid. Why are we removing this? I've only ever really heard two valid complaints about raiding:
1. It's repetitive. That's true it can be, but that can also be true about almost all aspects of these games. So repetitiveness by itself is not a reason to remove it.
2. Gear Grind. I understand some people don't like gear grinds. That's fine and EQN seems to be moving away from this, which I am fine with. So no real problem here then.
So why are we removing it ENQ again?
I have a feeling the real reason they are moving away from traditional raiding is because they are moving away from the Trinity. When you don't have the Trinity it's very hard to do complex PvE encounters. How do you do a boss fight with a MOB who can one shot clothies if there are no tanks and there is no way to effectively manage aggro? The answer is you can't. Removing the Trinity tends to turn these games into DPS zerg fests, and you can't have raids like that.
Look at GW2. Dungeons are a joke because they removed the Trinity. Those large scale PvE "public raids" are nothing more than zerg fests. Everyone just pew pews until the thing dies. There is no thought of strategy or tactics.
Why can't we have a game that integrates that sandbox elements of games like SWG, the public quests and non linear advancement of GW2, and the enjoyable theme-park aspects of games like WoW? Is that not possible? Why is it one or the other?
Yeah I want to have a house in the game, and maybe even a player city to put it in. I also want to be able to raid with my buddies once or twice a week.
-Ellessar-
It will work like in GW2, scalable Epic encounters where 30+ people try as hard as they can to smash button as fast as possible to kill the thing...................not my idea of Raiding.
Combat in EQNext seems pretty wrong, aimed at 12 y/o lightspeed typing wizards...................
It does sound a lot like the type of clusterfuck zergfest that GW2's "raids" are. Where you may have 40 people killing something, but they're not killing it together, they're basically each soloing alongside 39 others.
On the flipside, TSW - which has 1. Action Combat, 2. 7-ish ability slots 3. same type of cross-class system as EQN - it has some of the most diffculty and co-operative 5-man group content i've seen in any game. So it is possible to create complex content with action cmobat and limited abilities, but TSW does use a trinity though.
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO
Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall
Currently Playing: ESO
It's not action combat that kills raiding it's how developers create the game that does.
They could easily make collision so you can't pass trough people, tough dungeons were you don't rush but have to be careful of traps and sneaky encounters and trinity helps too with tanks on the front while the rest behind him just incase.
To conclude, I didn't read the whole thread just basing my post on the title.
I think there may be emergent raiding as in a bunch of tier 3 geared players get together to kill tier 4 NPCs in tier 4 dungeons. Other than that I dont know that there will be really restrictions because there are numerous boss fights in raids without an aggro table. There are still raid mechanics that can be implemented such as someone needing to be in melee range and say the boss does a massive strike and sicne someone has to be in melee to keep the boss from berserking or what have you the tanks stay in and take the cleave. The bug kiting fight in HoF in WoW in Mist is a great example of not needing tanks but having a strategy that requires kiting and DPS to kill what needs to be killed and not zerg on the boss.
I am not worried, they can do raids f they want to and I hope they do becasue I love them.
It might surprise you...
but most of the people playing mmos are NOT that into raiding.
We heard it all the time because the hardcore crowd tend to be more vocal about their feelings, and that's all.
It just means another MMO made top heavy with no endgame. Made for casuals and game hoppers not for veteran MMO players that want a long term game. Made for short term dollars and not for the long term. It is very sad to see the SOE do this to the EQ franchise and EQ playerbase. One might as well just call this game GW3.
But maybe its a bit to early to judge. We shall see. But so far it looks like a sellout game made to emphasize flash over substance. The next question is how do they plan to fleece people out of money. In GW2 it was massive box sale money. Without box sales in EQN they will have to take peoples money quickly in other ways.
The news of EQN seems to be just more evidence of the death of MMOs as big business drains the soul and life out of each new game. With the emphasis on hype and marketing over gameplay.