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!

So who decided that the Holy Trinity of class dynamics was a bad thing?

1246714

Comments

  • BrenelaelBrenelael Warren, MEPosts: 3,996Member
    Originally posted by Ramonski7
    Originally posted by Brenelael

    It has to do with making MMOs even more solo friendly. If there is no interdependence between classes than there is no need to group at all except for raiding. This has taken MMOs even further down the road to single player games. The really sad part of it is it seems to be what the majority of today's MMO gamers want so they will continue to add mechanics that will make MMO even more single player. In today's MMOs the vast majority of the content is designed for a single player to accomplish. Isn't that the very definition of a single player game? image

     

    Bren

    FALSE

    Elimination of select class dependency is one thing, this is the whole basis of me wanting to see the end of the traditional trinity. But anyone who is for the traditional trinity seems to sees it as calling for the elimination of group dynamics. Which is utterly false! I want party dynamics, I love group play. Hell FFXI used the trinity on a scale that allowed players to bring more than one set of skills to the table. What if EQN's system played out accordingly:

     

    You have 4 players with various classes and weapons at their disposal. Each has a sword and shield set, a bow, a mace and a staff. Players 1-3 all have warrior, paladin, ranger and cleric classes unlock. Player 4 has druid, ranger, warrior and mage unlocked. So they have to determine who going to play what roles.

     

    • Player 1---->sword/shield + warrior = tank
    • Player 2---->bow + ranger = dps
    • Player 3---->mace/shield + paladin = support
    • Player 4----> staff + druid = healer

    So say everyone is doing fine and player 4 decides to leave. Players 1-3 start looking for a replacement and find that healers are in short supply so player 2 decides to switch to cleric. So they find another player with the same sets of classes and weapons as player 4 and they switch the new party as follows:

     

    • Player 1--->sword/shield + paladin = tank
    • Player 2---->mace/shield + cleric = healer
    • Player 3--->staff + cleric = support
    • Player 5---->staff + mage =dps
    In both scenarios what we have is a elimination of class dependency but a strong need for all players, especially those that are versatile.

     

     

    ***PS this is just a example of how things could be...there could be many roles for players to play.

    This type of system I wouldn't mind as it mixes things up a little but sadly this is not the way they are heading. They are making it so anyone can be anything in some games without having to switch anything (Not talking about EQN here just modern non-Trinity MMOs in general). When the system is set up so I can Tank/Heal/DPS all at the same time I become a group of one and the whole group dynamic breaks down as there are no specific roles anymore or the line between roles becomes so blurred that they might as well not exist. At this point except for socialization there is absolutely no reason to group for 90% of the content in a game because other players become more of a hindrance than a boon.

     

    Oh and your example above is a Trinity system it just allows players to define their roles on the fly instead of being locked into just one.

     

    Bren

    while(horse==dead)
    {
    beat();
    }

  • KuppaKuppa Boulder, COPosts: 3,292Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by BadSpock
    Originally posted by Kuppa
    Originally posted by BadSpock
    Originally posted by Kuppa
    The big problem with the trinity is not the trinity itself. It's how it creates issues for grouping. LF Healer, LF tank. With the trinity you get the issue that most want to play dps and only some like to play healer and tank. Since most players are dps you get a ton of people that complain about this approach. 

    Most people only know Trinity in terms of WoW, which ruined their own mechanics a long, long time ago.

    Real, actually GOOD trinity based combat mechanics are still awesome and challenging / rewarding and fun.

    Forcing people to play tank or healer is not the answer. Some people do want to play a dps and having to put up with the elitism of the trinity is ridiculous.

    The trinity is fun and well defined but it causes this problem which I think is the main reason why it's getting looked at. It's not perfect.

    There isn't a problem, is what I'm saying.

    Typical encounter design in a trinity-based system requires more if not usually double or triple the number of DPS as Tanks/Healers - for a reason.

    The reward for playing a less popular yet highly desired role is = easier/faster access to group content

    The reward for playing the more popular yet less desired role = easier/faster access to solo play (and generally also PvP)

    Trade offs are a good thing.

    Choice and opportunity cost are a good thing.

    Player interdependency is what makes an MMORPG an MMORPG, truth be told.

    The problem is that a trade off that involves having to lock yourself to that archetype the entire game is not a good thing, which is what almost all mmos have been doing.

    image


    image

  • PanzakatPanzakat MartmeesterstraatPosts: 24Member
    UO never had the holy trinity.... /ponder
  • nottunednottuned st.paul, MNPosts: 92Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by BadSpock

    Player interdependency is what makes an MMORPG an MMORPG, truth be told.

    Only in the old days. Obviously player interdependency is not that desirable for most .. otherwise it would not be eroded through the years.

    MMORPG is progressing, like all other genre. Things change.

     

    choking is more like its. What MMORPG have you played recently for more the 6 months? 3 months?

    MMORPG's are devolving into what some want... a F2P multiplayer fps or a third person hack and slash rpg. While the people who like MMO's for what they actually are and scattered and lost.

    I think possibly the genre may be splitting and games are having something of an identity crisis of sorts. Niether is bad but the directions are changing. 

    The MMORPG style of old has evolving to do but it doesn't need to be scrapped.

  • xeniarxeniar Posts: 805Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Kuppa
    Originally posted by BadSpock
    Originally posted by Kuppa
    Originally posted by BadSpock
    Originally posted by Kuppa
    The big problem with the trinity is not the trinity itself. It's how it creates issues for grouping. LF Healer, LF tank. With the trinity you get the issue that most want to play dps and only some like to play healer and tank. Since most players are dps you get a ton of people that complain about this approach. 

    Most people only know Trinity in terms of WoW, which ruined their own mechanics a long, long time ago.

    Real, actually GOOD trinity based combat mechanics are still awesome and challenging / rewarding and fun.

    Forcing people to play tank or healer is not the answer. Some people do want to play a dps and having to put up with the elitism of the trinity is ridiculous.

    The trinity is fun and well defined but it causes this problem which I think is the main reason why it's getting looked at. It's not perfect.

    There isn't a problem, is what I'm saying.

    Typical encounter design in a trinity-based system requires more if not usually double or triple the number of DPS as Tanks/Healers - for a reason.

    The reward for playing a less popular yet highly desired role is = easier/faster access to group content

    The reward for playing the more popular yet less desired role = easier/faster access to solo play (and generally also PvP)

    Trade offs are a good thing.

    Choice and opportunity cost are a good thing.

    Player interdependency is what makes an MMORPG an MMORPG, truth be told.

    The problem is that a trade off that involves having to lock yourself to that archetype the entire game is not a good thing, which is what almost all mmos have been doing.

    Roll an alt mabey? its redicolous to me that a warrior also is able to use magic. we already have that its called a paladin. What will happen is people will create whatever the ultimate combo will be with weapon/ skills and evryone and his mother will spec that way. its stupid.

  • BadSpockBadSpock Somewhere, MIPosts: 7,974Member
    Originally posted by Kuppa
    Originally posted by BadSpock
    Originally posted by Kuppa
    Originally posted by BadSpock
    Originally posted by Kuppa
    The big problem with the trinity is not the trinity itself. It's how it creates issues for grouping. LF Healer, LF tank. With the trinity you get the issue that most want to play dps and only some like to play healer and tank. Since most players are dps you get a ton of people that complain about this approach. 

    Most people only know Trinity in terms of WoW, which ruined their own mechanics a long, long time ago.

    Real, actually GOOD trinity based combat mechanics are still awesome and challenging / rewarding and fun.

    Forcing people to play tank or healer is not the answer. Some people do want to play a dps and having to put up with the elitism of the trinity is ridiculous.

    The trinity is fun and well defined but it causes this problem which I think is the main reason why it's getting looked at. It's not perfect.

    There isn't a problem, is what I'm saying.

    Typical encounter design in a trinity-based system requires more if not usually double or triple the number of DPS as Tanks/Healers - for a reason.

    The reward for playing a less popular yet highly desired role is = easier/faster access to group content

    The reward for playing the more popular yet less desired role = easier/faster access to solo play (and generally also PvP)

    Trade offs are a good thing.

    Choice and opportunity cost are a good thing.

    Player interdependency is what makes an MMORPG an MMORPG, truth be told.

    The problem is that a trade off that involves having to lock yourself to that archetype the entire game is not a good thing, which is what almost all mmos have been doing.

    100% false.

    Most if not all of these games have dual spec or tri spec or quad spec or like in FFXIV you just equip another weapon and bam you are a new class/new role...

  • PlumpPlump Acushnet, MAPosts: 10Member
    I want the holy trinity to exist. I want the holy quadfecta to exist. I want players to feel like their role in combat matters. I feel like the only thing that should have been adjusted was the mechanic of threat tables and "taunt". Players that tank want to feel burley, at the helm, pace-setting. They could have easily reworked threat mechanics and retained the core pillars of group combat. Instead of taunting, A tank could simply soak damage, debuff mobs, weave interrupts and generally mitigate the party's damage taken.
  • BadSpockBadSpock Somewhere, MIPosts: 7,974Member
    Originally posted by Panzakat
    UO never had the holy trinity.... /ponder

    UO also had the most simplistic combat mechanics ever, and there were certainly "builds" that most players preferred to play as.

  • Grimlock426Grimlock426 Sacramento, CAPosts: 159Member

    It seems apparent to me that many of the responders in this thread have only played MMO's in the past few years.

    There is nothing wrong with the trinity.  What's wrong is that developers have dumbed it down over the years so that its an abomination compared to what it once was.

    The reason there is no social interaction in 5-man groups now days in WoW is because the developers have dumbed down the encounters, not because of the trinity or stale "aggro" mechanics.

    Now all you have to do is have the tank run in and round up all the mobs, while the healer heals him and the DPS AOE like crazy.  There is virtually no threat to worry about and the tanks generate so much aggro that the mobs never leave them.  Of course this makes it seem easy and boring.  Why would you need to socialize?  You don't!

    Back in vanilla WoW with dungeons like Strathholme, Scholomance, Lower Black Rock spires, upper black rock spires you had to communicate and play correctly or it would be a wipe-fest.  DPS were every bit as important as the tank and healer back then as well because DPS were also expected to buff/debuff, off-tank and crowd control.  For the most part tanks couldn't hold threat on most trash packs and so the DPS had to do their job or the group would fail. 

    Rarely did the healer get to just sit back and heal with impunity.  The tank was lucky to be holding 2-3 mobs attentions. It was also very easy to pull aggro through over healing or too much DPS.  DPS now days have no idea about aggro-management...they don't have to.  Healers can chain heal to their hearts content...that was not always the case.

    Count me as someone who does not see the trinity as broken at all.  I just believe the developers need to go back more to the past and how combat worked, when threat and aggro really meant something, and then just add some tweaks to the system.  Sure, you can make the mobs smarter and you can expand some class roles and give more flexibility, but to me the trinity system was one of the least things wrong with the MMO genre.

    I'd list many things as a bigger problem:

    1 - Not being able to make real changes to the world.

    2 - Contstant gear-grind treadmill

    3- Instanced PvP with no consequences

    4 - Boring and stale quest system

    etc, etc.

  • TheocritusTheocritus Gary, INPosts: 3,734Member Uncommon
    I dont really get the non trinity argument....The only thing I can understand about what they are saying is that "the group is going to do so much damage so fast that no one will die"......We dont need someone armored to the hilt using defensive maneuvers to win this battle and we dont need specialist healers either......The non trinity argument seems to be one posed by many soloers gathering together to take down a boss while the trinity argument is one posed by role players who want to have a defined role in a group.
  • BadSpockBadSpock Somewhere, MIPosts: 7,974Member
    Originally posted by Grimlock426

    It seems apparent to me that many of the responders in this thread have only played MMO's in the past few years.

    There is nothing wrong with the trinity.  What's wrong is that developers have dumbed it down over the years so that its an abomination compared to what it once was.

    The reason there is no social interaction in 5-man groups now days in WoW is because the developers have dumbed down the encounters, not because of the trinity or stale "aggro" mechanics.

    Now all you have to do is have the tank run in and round up all the mobs, while the healer heals him and the DPS AOE like crazy.  There is virtually no threat to worry about and the tanks generate so much aggro that the mobs never leave them.  Of course this makes it seem easy and boring.  Why would you need to socialize?  You don't!

    Back in vanilla WoW with dungeons like Strathholme, Scholomance, Lower Black Rock spires, upper black rock spires you had to communicate and play correctly or it would be a wipe-fest.  DPS were every bit as important as the tank and healer back then as well because DPS were also expected to buff/debuff, off-tank and crowd control.  For the most part tanks couldn't hold threat on most trash packs and so the DPS had to do their job or the group would fail. 

    Rarely did the healer get to just sit back and heal with impunity.  The tank was lucky to be holding 2-3 mobs attentions. 

    Count me as someone who does not see the trinity as broken at all.  I just believe the developers need to go back more to the past and how combat worked, when threat and aggro really meant something, and then just add some tweaks to the system.  Sure, you can make the mobs smarter and you can expand some class roles and give more flexibility, but to me the trinity system was one of the least things wrong with the MMO genre.

    EXACTLY

  • krondinkrondin tallapoosa, GAPosts: 103Member Uncommon

    After reading alot of this discussion, I realized opinions about why its good and why its not so good, to have trinity in game play, are varied.  A lot of good points both Pro and Con. We have evolved as gamers with our own tastes of how we want to play a game vs how games were back between 1998 and 2008 and some still today.  Maybe one day in the not so distant future , game developers can make games with a variety of play styles in one game which could be accomplished with the use of designated servers. So people who prefer group oriented required content as well as the folks more prone to solo or smaller less role specific grouping could all have their fun in the same game.

    If i were putting out a game today, I would try to have different type of play servers for my game , so most people had type they liked.  What i believe would be found if this happened, even with just a small selection of server types, would be people saying they like one style and in fact most migrating to a single type .... the group required type. WHY? because despite what people say about what they like in a game the facts remain the same, most people play online games to SOCIALIZE . Not to run around by themselves soloing everything except where there is a community to brag about it in, hence still a type of socializing.

     

    Games that fail in community , the basic need for people to communicate with each other and interact inside these games are the ones who don't do well. Even games designed for grouping can fail at good socializing within their games. Finding the right mixture of varied playstyles while keeping a solid need for players to communicate and group is the key to a great game. Nothing out currently is better at this then WoW, which is why, even with falling subs , they still remain #1. The decline for them began as they removed individuality of your characters and made the game world easy to solo. The more they have pushed players into less of a working together, communicating social hub, and less grouping needed game, the more subs they continue to loose. ( I do not play wow, but I used to ) ........This is all just my " Two Cents Worth" , Thank You for reading it all!

  • Riposte.ThisRiposte.This Toronto, ONPosts: 192Member
    Originally posted by Pr0tag0ni5t

    I have been reading a lot recently about how the 'holy trinity' needs to disappear from mmo's. I know the idea has been tossed around for years but never in such force. Now, developers and games have started to make the shift. 

    I guess my question is: Is this the problem with MMO's today, the Holy Trinity, and by eliminating it will the MMO's be better?

    ^ this

    It really is about making a game more solo friendly. With a lot of MMO's, the population drops eventually, and when that happens it becomes hard to find people to play those specific roles. They even mentioned it in the panel, and one of them even said "say this guy stops playing the game".

    So now they are building games around the idea that no matter what you will always be able to successfully play the game. It's smart in a way, because when a game that is great (Everquest 2) loses it's population, you're left to try and scrounge up people to fill roles like enchanters and bards.

    The holy trinity isn't any better or worse than it was when it was first introduced, it's the same, and it's still great but this way sort of future proofs their game / content... I don't like it as I am a fan of the holy trinity, and having strict class roles.

    Killing dragons is my shit

  • VentlusVentlus spanaway, WAPosts: 96Member

    Well i have to say i think the eq dev's and alot of people are wrong about why the trinity exists. It exists more so for the players then, An Ai restraint. It helps them guide their roles more easily, and creates for groups that are predictable instead of like a sandbox where who knows what might happen. Not say unpredictability is bad, as i will play eq next regardless of trinity in it or not, but i have yet to play a trinity-less game that has pve raiding/groups that i like. GW2 for instance did away with the standard trinity, it made everyone able to do everything. And it has to be one of the worst games i've every played, I think it was particularly a dev choice that did this for me but the end game content is boring as shit. Its just a grind, no challenge, just zerg of dps with some utility. I like being able to be the standard healer and not being forced to dps if i don't want to, and its not really an option in guildwars 2. Every now and then i like to tank, and its hard as it is to get people with a brain to target properly with taunt, just sounds like eq will just be random clusterfucks of dps on mobs. As why build a super defensive character when mobs attack who ever they want anyways, might as well just have dps.

    I just want challenge in pve raid content with cool mechanics to it, and I just can't see that going well in my head, but hey theirs no game out like that so guess will have to wait see. Hopefully eq next puts in some sustaining content with, and doesn't do gw2 approach!

  • DrakynnDrakynn The Pas, MBPosts: 2,030Member

    I have to say reading through there's a few misconceptions here:

    1) There was dislike of the Trinity from many people in these forums way before Guild Wars 2.

    2) There were action combat games on the PC way before Tera and it's ilk,there were even action combat RPGs way before the birth of consoles albeit  so it may be new to MMOs but not to PC in  any way.This also has nothing to do with the Trinity because you can have action combat with the trinity intact.

    3) As Phry said anything posted here should be taken as personal opinion unless proof of fact is provided via reputable links,even my comments here as I'm not about to spend my time providing links for the above coz I'm lazy and would rather spend my time doing other things.

    Ok now to my opinion on the thread topic :

    I think anyone who thinks The Trinity is the only way to make group content is not using their imaginatiion and also hasn't studied war and the strategies and tactics thereof.

    I don't hate the trilogy but it is an old simplification of the basic combat roles of war : defense,offense and support.It was necessary for the time because of hardware limitations and network limitation that are no longer true now.

    I think it's time for those three roles to be used in more sophisticated and interesting ways with more sophisticated and interesting mobs too.If done right this will make group content more varied and even more reliant on good teamwork.

    Just because past games who have tried have come up short doesn't mean it can't and won't be done,some times you take small steps till you find the right direction.

  • czombieczombie Monroe, MIPosts: 82Member
    Originally posted by krondin

    If i were putting out a game today, I would try to have different type of play servers for my game , so most people had type they liked.  What i believe would be found if this happened, even with just a small selection of server types, would be people saying they like one style and in fact most migrating to a single type .... the group required type. WHY? because despite what people say about what they like in a game the facts remain the same, most people play online games to SOCIALIZE . Not to run around by themselves soloing everything except where there is a community to brag about it in, hence still a type of socializing.

    I didn't realize that MMO's were taking away the ability for people to be social.  I still do play WoW and there are all kinds of ways to interact with other people if one so chooses.  None of them have been taken away.  Instead, I have the freedom to also play on my own if I'm having a bad day and don't really want to chat with people and just beat on mobs in low-level quests that I haven't finished yet or solo some lower level instance and make some money on the auction house.  If I didn't have the choice to do this, I would probably play less and might even unsubscribe and spend my time playing console or 4X games.

    The evolution of MMO's has been all about giving players more choices in order to attract more different types of players.  It's a shame that old-school MMO'ers want everybody's personality to be exactly like theirs so that they can enjoy their games more.  This strikes me as some kind of annoying groupthink.  I play games to escape from reality, not to have more idiots try to force their version of what they want reality to be upon me.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by nottuned
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by BadSpock

    Player interdependency is what makes an MMORPG an MMORPG, truth be told.

    Only in the old days. Obviously player interdependency is not that desirable for most .. otherwise it would not be eroded through the years.

    MMORPG is progressing, like all other genre. Things change.

     

    choking is more like its. What MMORPG have you played recently for more the 6 months? 3 months?

    MMORPG's are devolving into what some want... a F2P multiplayer fps or a third person hack and slash rpg. While the people who like MMO's for what they actually are and scattered and lost.

    I think possibly the genre may be splitting and games are having something of an identity crisis of sorts. Niether is bad but the directions are changing. 

    The MMORPG style of old has evolving to do but it doesn't need to be scrapped.

    STO .. on and off though.

    But the point is exactly what you said ... genre may be splitting. Player interdependency is not universally desired. More games are dialed DOWN on it. Personally i don't want to depend on others for my fun.

    And there is no such thing as what MMOs "actually are". They are what devs make them into. And the fact that there is less player interdependency .. is market forces at work.

    Whether it is changed, or scapped is up to the market.

     

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by czombie
    Originally posted by krondin If i were putting out a game today, I would try to have different type of play servers for my game , so most people had type they liked.  What i believe would be found if this happened, even with just a small selection of server types, would be people saying they like one style and in fact most migrating to a single type .... the group required type. WHY? because despite what people say about what they like in a game the facts remain the same, most people play online games to SOCIALIZE . Not to run around by themselves soloing everything except where there is a community to brag about it in, hence still a type of socializing.
    I didn't realize that MMO's were taking away the ability for people to be social.  I still do play WoW and there are all kinds of ways to interact with other people if one so chooses.  None of them have been taken away.  Instead, I have the freedom to also play on my own if I'm having a bad day and don't really want to chat with people and just beat on mobs in low-level quests that I haven't finished yet or solo some lower level instance and make some money on the auction house.  If I didn't have the choice to do this, I would probably play less and might even unsubscribe and spend my time playing console or 4X games.

    The evolution of MMO's has been all about giving players more choices in order to attract more different types of players.  It's a shame that old-school MMO'ers want everybody's personality to be exactly like theirs so that they can enjoy their games more.  This strikes me as some kind of annoying groupthink.  I play games to escape from reality, not to have more idiots try to force their version of what they want reality to be upon me.




    On these boards, you might want to substitute "forced interaction" with "social interaction". Forced interactions are technically social interactions, but they aren't necessarily fun or fulfilling. I've never had any issues socializing in MMORPGs, and few if any of those have been because I needed the interactions.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer ChairPosts: 5,587Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Darth-Batman
    The genre is simply evolving and I dont think that means all mmos will change but I do think it means there will be more variety for players and I dont see that being a bad thing.

    The evolution of the genre should happen. But forcing it and doing it for it's own sake is not good. I've sen way too many things done to this genre in the name of progress that is anything but.MMO progress over the years has been little more than robbing Peter to pay Paul. Get one thing new (That in itself is of questionable value) and it comes at the cost of something else that we didn't need to lose.

     

    Think about your time in WoW. What did you hate most? For me, it was entering a dungeon with someone I didn't know. Running with guildmates that we'd been familiar with made it better. Because we had time to get used to each other's coordination within a specific situation. But throw in random dynamics and we are going to be back at the PuG level again since what you know about your friends doesn't matter since no one knows the fights anyway.

    This whole Trinity system we have was from that  progress. But it's not a system that came because MMOs needed it. Players did. It's a stop gap mechanic. As encounters became more complicated due to increases in AI (scripting), the group's ability to coordinate and respond couldn't keep up. The trinity is the crutch. But not for the game, for the players. The human ability to coordinate is not going t o improve with better game AI.

  • jdnycjdnyc Long Island City, NYPosts: 1,696Member

    LF1M need Tank gtg

    LF1M Need Tank GTG

    LF1M NEED TANK GTG

    LF1M need healer gtg

    LF1M NEED HEALER GTG

    LF1M NEED TANK GTG

    LF2M NEED HEALZ AND TANK GTG ;)

    LF2M NEED TANK, GOT HEALZ

     

    See a pattern?  Don't blame Devs for trying to fix a problem that players created.  Blame the majority of players that don't want the responsibility of healing or tanking for the rest of the group.  Majority of players want to be carried in the Holy Trinity and that is why it has failed.  It's not about the system or the mechanics, it's about player behavior and that will not never change.

     

  • nolic1nolic1 Kingman, AZPosts: 687Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by xeniar

    Roll an alt mabey? its redicolous to me that a warrior also is able to use magic. we already have that its called a paladin. What will happen is people will create whatever the ultimate combo will be with weapon/ skills and evryone and his mother will spec that way. its stupid.

    Originally posted by BadSpock

    UO also had the most simplistic combat mechanics ever, and there were certainly "builds" that most players preferred to play as.

    But just like in most mmo's there is no reason for things like skill trees and such cause everyone follow the flavor of the month build and games like GW2 and even EQ:N are trying to break away from the defined setup. Even in EQ2 if you dont have your AA's setup to a certain way no one will let you in a raid or dungeon group. Blizzard did away with trees most likely because the diversity of builds came down to one anyways. And then you have games like Fallen Earth that have no classes at all but everyone expects you to build to there standards this has been in mmo's for ever where if you dont follow the band wagon you get left out. The problem is not just that but the fact that in mmo's today your role is defined as one of the following Tank, Heal, CC, DPS, or Support but in most is Tank, Heal, DPS period. So you dont get to be a diverse tank anymore your role is set in stone you can nolonger be a warrior or paladin your a tank, you are no more a cleric shaman or druid your  a healer, and you are no longer a mage or rogue or assassin or what ever your DPS. Games lost there way and going back and to the start and making them defined is ok but you still have no option to be diverse instead your stuck being Tank, Heal, DPS and the games will be that way because that works well to some. But I dont want to be stuck being a druid who only thing to do is heal I want to be a druid with diversity and not be like every druid on the server.

    image
    To me I enjoy gaming I dont play to be uber I play to have fun. If a game is not fun to me guess what I move on and play something else till I find one that is. When I find that great game and not sure if in my life time there will be one I hope it has everything I want in an mmo.

  • botrytisbotrytis In Flux, MIPosts: 2,567Member
    Originally posted by jdnyc

    LF1M need Tank gtg

    LF1M Need Tank GTG

    LF1M NEED TANK GTG

    LF1M need healer gtg

    LF1M NEED HEALER GTG

    LF1M NEED TANK GTG

    LF2M NEED HEALZ AND TANK GTG ;)

    LF2M NEED TANK, GOT HEALZ

     

    See a pattern?  Don't blame Devs for trying to fix a problem that players created.  Blame the majority of players that don't want the responsibility of healing or tanking for the rest of the group.  Majority of players want to be carried in the Holy Trinity and that is why it has failed.  It's not about the system or the mechanics, it's about player behavior and that will not never change.

     

    That is why the developers changed the mechanic.

    image

    "In 50 years, when I talk to my grandchildren about these days, I'll make sure to mention what an accomplished MMO player I was. They are going to be so proud ..."
    by Naqaj - 7/17/2013 MMORPG.com forum

  • xeniarxeniar Posts: 805Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by jdnyc

    LF1M need Tank gtg

    LF1M Need Tank GTG

    LF1M NEED TANK GTG

    LF1M need healer gtg

    LF1M NEED HEALER GTG

    LF1M NEED TANK GTG

    LF2M NEED HEALZ AND TANK GTG ;)

    LF2M NEED TANK, GOT HEALZ

     

    See a pattern?  Don't blame Devs for trying to fix a problem that players created.  Blame the majority of players that don't want the responsibility of healing or tanking for the rest of the group.  Majority of players want to be carried in the Holy Trinity and that is why it has failed.  It's not about the system or the mechanics, it's about player behavior and that will not never change.

     

    So lets all be DPS and give the guys who have a clue an even harder time to carry the group?

    edit: removing the trinity will complicate combat because evryone will be all over the damn place with no communication. thus having to dumb down the mobs or enjoy the wipefests.

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,638Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nolic1
    Originally posted by aesperus
    Originally posted by Pr0tag0ni5t

    I have been reading a lot recently about how the 'holy trinity' needs to disappear from mmo's. I know the idea has been tossed around for years but never in such force. Now, developers and games have started to make the shift. 

    I guess my question is: Is this the problem with MMO's today, the Holy Trinity, and by eliminating it will the MMO's be better?

    It's been explained to death, but here goes round.. what round of this discussion are we on? Anyways.

    First off, there's no need to find blame on this. This isn't something that you can just point to someone and say 'it's that guys fault! He's the reason people don't wanna make trinity games anymore!' Doesn't work like that.

    That said, developers & players alike have been discussing the many problems with the trinity system for almost a decade. It's only recently (within the passed year) that we are finally getting some games that don't involve a trinity, and it's being blown way out of proportion. Trinity games are still (currently) the dominant MMO on the market, by quite a large margin. And yet, some people are treating this like the 'last stand' of the trinity mindset.

    So what are the problems with the trinity?

    1) It caters to fairly simplistic combat. Fights revolve around a very 1-dimensional mechanic (threat), and this limits the class dynamic by quite a bit.

    2) It puts far too much emphasis on the 2 least played classes. The tank, and the healer. While the trinity is great for people who enjoy playing a tank or healer, most players don't. These two classes practically get treated like royalty, because you simply can't progress in the game without them. They are essential, and often can be hard to get in your group. Yes there have been progression guilds that make this easier, but it just puts even more pressure on the tank / healer. He HAS to be there for the big raid, everything else (real life or not) is secondary!

    3) The trinity is based off primitive / dated AI. This goes back to the 1-dimensional threat mechanic. People are tired of fighting enemies that behave, well, like idiots. Anyone with half a brain knows that if you were the raid boss, you would say 'to hell with the tank, I'm taking out that guy shooting meteors at my face!' or 'that healer's gotta die first'. Something along those lines. However that's exactly the opposite of how trinity combat works. Because it can't. This also leads to the next problem:

    4) PvP. With a trinity system, tanks are often left out in the cold when it comes to PvP. This is because they are mostly useless outside of their extremely artificial threat mechanic. Which doesn't work in PvP. A few games (like WAR) have experimented with ways to fix this, but it's always been a problem. Another one being that often the team w/ the healers wins, because of how powerful the heals get. It's also not uncommon to run into extremely boring fights, where no one dies, because you just can't outdamage the healing.

    5) Que times. In trinity games most people (non tank / healers) have to wait a LONG time to get into a group if they wanna run a dungeon or something. This just gets worse as games age and people leave to play other games.

    I could go on, but I think you get the idea. And this post is already passed the length, where most people stop reading.

    I have to agree here with the above this is one of the main reasons besides it became a comfort zone to players to want this who wouldn't. But its time for change yeah GW2 has a zergy feel but now that players have panned out and you dont have a  zerg army leading you I find the game to be at the right difficulty for new and vet players and it works for the most part. But its not perfect and no game will be not to every one and this is where another factor comes to play everyone is different so everyones opinion is to so to alot GW2 is lame to others its not. To some Wow is candy land while to others not. To many UO is just super atari and lame but to some its not point is with so many more players then in the past you can not make everyone happy so you have to find a medium to make it feel ok for all. And thats what I see happing in todays mmo's companys trying to find that medium that works for all but it still wont work for some. So now we have alot of old timers or vets who have grown accustom to the trinity but they want change but when change happens they dont like it cause it takes them out of there comfort zone of what they feel is right but its really not right why cant the boss attack someone who just crit him causing his life to drop faster I know if I was that boss I would then if I seem someone try to heal someone to keep that one in a fight he would have to be hurt to and so on.

    Point is no one like change cause change is different and it takes people out of there comfort zone. It no different in real life take someone out of what there used to and put them in something new and the change can drive then to insanity. And most here have been in that comfort zone for 20 years some less but its still that same.

    +1 to both y'all. :)

    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

  • BladestromBladestrom edinburghPosts: 4,941Member Uncommon
    +1 as well. The twins in gw2 ac in early days (where you had to seperate them) was a superb example of a highly strategic fight with roles that did not involve a pure trinity, e.g, kite/cc specced for dmg limitation and speed and spike to grab attention while others with dmg limitation and dps.

    Perfectly possible to have interesting battle that has no Zerg or tank, we just need the developers to resist temptation to go for the old old ways and start evolving gameplay again into domething fresh.

    rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar

    Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D

Sign In or Register to comment.