Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

No Trinity, No Tanks, No Thanks

1568101115

Comments

  • EnrifEnrif PforzheimPosts: 152Member Uncommon

    there is a simple way to make a threat system that plays different then today.

     

    Today the player generate equal threat to any enemy, every threat is counted as the same.

     

    But what if some mobs generate more threat if some one uses heal magic. If some mobs lose threat when some one uses firemagic(cause they absorb fire, so why attacking?). If a mob only generates threat to ranged attacks(no threat from heals or buffs). If a mob generates only hate to the ones that attacks him with melee weapons(no threat from heals or buffs).

     

    in all this scenarios the classical tank will fail, except the last one. And Storybricks adds a system that sets the likes/dislikes of npcs, its already an improvement to the classical trinity. you will need all kinds of different class setups to handle those.

    Heal-Tanks, Water-Damage-Tanks, Ranged-Tanks

     

    If it turns to a zerg, then only because the players can't handle the different likes/dislikes of the NPCs

  • MinscMinsc Burford, ONPosts: 1,298Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Rydeson
    Originally posted by Kajidourden
    Originally posted by Minsc
    Originally posted by Rydeson
    Good Luck with the Storybricks.. you might want to wait till you actually SEE IT in action.. :)   We've all been down this hype road before..  I suspect we'll end up with chaotic zerg combat similar to GW2, or you end up with controlled combat like the trinity..  Take your pick,  :) 

    Right no one has seen it in action yet, so why dismiss it. Sony didn't create StoryBricks, it's a company that specializes in creating AI, so I'm waiting to see what it's like but I'm hopefull that it will make a difference.

    I also fully believe that the people crying for storybricks to be revolutionary don't know what they're getting themselves into.  When they finally do get it....I have a feeling they'll realize that it's not what they expected or really wanted.

         From what I read so far about Storybricks.. It's just another AI with "more" variables on how mob's interact with the world and players..  Now when it comes to combat.. We'll either get zerg combat, or you'll get threat management combat.. I too think some are expecting too much from Storybricks.. As I said before I suspect that EQN combat will resemble GW2 a lot more then EQ1..

    That's generalizing a bit. They  set up the npc's to have needs/wants and give them different actions that they can choose to achieve them. It's definitely more complex than your standard AI. Basically in your current AI the mobs follow very basic pre-scripted behaviour. Player attacks group of mobs, mobs use threat variable to determine who to attack, mobs attack highest threat character. Tank uses taunt to go to top of threat table. Once the encounter is underway the AI just follows the pre-scripted pattern until all the npc's are dead or the party is.

    With Storybricks the AI the NPC's base their actions on the Need/Wants set up for them. So when the encounter starts the NPC will determine whether they are likely to survive the encounter and if not, they will want to survive, so they would in that case flee towards the nearest camp of allies. If they decide that they may be able to defeat the player they will stay and fight and then the process starts over. Whether the npc is in combat or not it's still the same system determining what the npc will do.

    You keep talking as if there will be a separate AI for combat and for everything else when SOE has specifically said it is all the same underlying AI.

  • RydesonRydeson Canton, OHPosts: 3,852Member Uncommon
         Min.. you might want to wait for the numbers on this..  combat AI is different then NPC interaction AI..  One is threat management and the other is NOT..  No one knows at this point even what skills and abilities are available, which will tell us a lot about the game and roles..  Will there be "complete heals"?  Will there be "snaring" of mobs?  Will there be "charming" or "mezing" of mobs?  Will there be feign death? Will I be able to kite, or have pets?  GW2 failed to give us anything like what I just described, at least like we had in original EQ..
  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Houston, TXPosts: 8,918Member Rare
    I didnt even know MMOs where still making classes of any kind this year anymore (other than elder scrolls of course)

    Oculus keeps selling out more often than not

  • moosecatlolmoosecatlol Boring, TXPosts: 1,266Member Uncommon
    Go back to table top games if you want boring combat. Keep the cancer out of mmos.
  • MinscMinsc Burford, ONPosts: 1,298Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Rydeson
         Min.. you might want to wait for the numbers on this..  combat AI is different then NPC interaction AI..  One is threat management and the other is NOT..  No one knows at this point even what skills and abilities are available, which will tell us a lot about the game and roles..  Will there be "complete heals"?  Will there be "snaring" of mobs?  Will there be "charming" or "mezing" of mobs?  Will there be feign death? Will I be able to kite, or have pets?  GW2 failed to give us anything like what I just described, at least like we had in original EQ..

    *sigh* The combat AI and the NPC interaction AI is the same, they have already stated specifically that. Someone linked an interview where they explicitly said this.

  • AlleinAllein Posts: 2,028Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by Rydeson
    Good Luck with the Storybricks.. you might want to wait till you actually SEE IT in action.. :)   We've all been down this hype road before..  I suspect we'll end up with chaotic zerg combat similar to GW2, or you end up with controlled combat like the trinity..  Take your pick,  :) 

         From what I read so far about Storybricks.. It's just another AI with "more" variables on how mob's interact with the world and players..  Now when it comes to combat.. We'll either get zerg combat, or you'll get threat management combat.. I too think some are expecting too much from Storybricks.. As I said before I suspect that EQN combat will resemble GW2 a lot more then EQ1..

         Min.. you might want to wait for the numbers on this..  combat AI is different then NPC interaction AI..  One is threat management and the other is NOT..  No one knows at this point even what skills and abilities are available, which will tell us a lot about the game and roles..  Will there be "complete heals"?  Will there be "snaring" of mobs?  Will there be "charming" or "mezing" of mobs?  Will there be feign death? Will I be able to kite, or have pets?  GW2 failed to give us anything like what I just described, at least like we had in original EQ..

    How will you avoid every fight being a ping-pong DPS race ala GW2?

    Terry Michaels: We have only scratched the surface so far talking about multiclassing and combat in EverQuest Next. Once we’re ready to talk in more detail, we’ll be able to address this question and the underlying concerns.

    What line, if any, is drawn between interaction between “Human” NPCs such as guards, merchants, etc and “Monster” NPCs, and what distinctions can be made between interaction between these two groups other than initial “kill on sight” status with the player? Can players in essence abandon the entire world of human NPCs in favor of “going native” among monster NPCs?

    Storybricks: We’re not going to talk about design specifics for EverQuest Next. However, we can say that we are creating a unified AI architecture for combat and non-combat behaviors, which means that NPCs inside combat could potentially have a much greater range of reactions to PCs than just “kill on sight” (and a lot more varied goals, as explained in the presentation of rallying calls) and vice-versa: NPCs’ daily lives could be affected by the potential occurence of combat, either as a threat or a goal.

    Where can AI in EQNext go?

    Terry Michaels: Our goal for EverQuest Next is to work with Storybricks to create an experience for players that hasn’t been seen before in an MMO. So to answer your question, it can go as far as we need to in order to reach our goal!

    What kinds of things can an encounter learn to do, to combat player tactics?

    Terry Michaels: Both in and out of combat the characters in our world are going to be watching what the players do and reacting to them in organic ways in order to try to satisfy their current wants and needs. This isn’t so much about “learning” as it is about interacting and reacting to what’s happening around you in an understandable and smart way.

    If you played EQ and GW2, why didn't people Zerg in EQ? Or WOW or any other game for that matter? Why is there such a need to compare to GW2?

    Couldn't 20-50 random players rolled around in EQ killing everything? Or just 10 druids run in a pack without the need of others? Why did people fall into particular roles?

    Simply removing taunt and heal spam instantly turns people into mindless zerg zombies? Or is there more to it?

    My answer is that GW2 was designed poorly or well depending on how you look at it. PVE is a joke and a means to an end, that being WvWvW. They wanted a time sink, but at the same time wanted to make it some what painless and rolling around on a loop seemed to be okay for that.

    People complained all the time about it of course, I don't remember anyone going, "Damn I love spamming AOEs to tag mobs that die before my damage hits!"

    Every class is designed to DPS above all else. PVE is designed with static spawns that connect and loop that players can follow along a path either in a small group or a huge zerg. Respawn is so quick that it is more profitable and rewarding to just tag a long even though I'm assuming most find it boring, not fun, and leaving no room for individuality or thinking for one's self. Just follow and spam, yay!

    WoW catered to soloing for the most part.

    EQ catered to small groups.

    Etc Etc.

    Each game is designed a way to help players reach a goal. That goal usually being max level, remove levels and things change a bit. Of course there will be some form of general progression, but maybe grinding mobs as quickly as possible isn't the best way to reach a goal. Gotta look at the reason why people are doing certain actions to begin with.

    So far SOE and Storybricks have made no indication that zerging is the route they want to go down. They gone out of their way to say "We don't want to be like GW2." Yet some how some of you think that is exactly what they intend to do. Devs aren't morons, they don't accidentally design a game to play a certain way. It might not be the way some players want, but it is rarely some unforeseen event. Did they promise a zerg free game, not that I remember. Nor did they promise a game revolving around only small group PVE either.

    SOE has promised a huge world with multiple tiers, procedurally generated content, dynamic mobs, AI that roams and "does what it wants", etc. Along with classes (40+) with roles that aren't self contained soloing machines like GW2's. How any of that fits into GW2 structure is a question I can't answer.

    Removing the trinity doesn't magically equate to GW2 or zerging, several other elements have to come into play for it to happen. Same as why so many dislike what WoW has become, it isn't 1 or 2 things, it is a long list of issues that when combined, the game loses it's appeal very quickly. So many are quick to talk trash after they spent 5-10 years playing just like everyone else.

    I've never heard anyone say they prefer zerging over any sort of meaningful structure. This leads me to believe that if a game rewards those that avoid zerging, players won't do it. Why would they?

    Means to an end. If zerging isn't the best path, it won't be what people follow. Heck, for all we know, if a mob requires 1 player to kill and 10 tag it, there could be zero reward making zerging 100% pointless. 

    You are right that we should wait and see before getting too excited, so should you and others so quick to jump to conclusions that completely go against what SOE has said.

    Again, progress is progress. We can either have the same system that has been done to death or try something new. Why anyone wouldn't at least want something even remotely better is confusing. GW2 isn't a terrible game (didn't hold me very long), but I can't see why it has become the new benchmark of what not to be. I doubt devs develop their game going "Lets make our game exactly like X, faults and all." 

    By the way, what about a chaotic "trinity"? Group of players with different classes (roles) run up against a group of mobs, why can't the action be unpredictable (to a point) with players maintaining their structure? Look for the grey between the black and white. Some people might actually want a challenge while having some strategy.

    Every group member contributing to combat (even it it is just 5 people) and doing DPS isn't zerging. It is by design and what SOE seems to be going for. It makes far more sense for everyone to attempt to kill a target then have everyone split doing only 1 role. No reason it can't be flexible and allow players to contribute in numerous ways.

    If EQN simply removes the option for mass groups of people to roam around in a herd by making it less rewarding and by having AI that requires teamwork and strategy for smaller groups, zerging of both numbers and dps spam go away.

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Posts: 6,296Member Rare

    I have to admit that after GW2 I thought I would never play another MMO without the trinity. I tweeted David Georgeson about it and he said "If you're not fond of GW2's combat, that's okay. It's not what we're building. You'll see, eventually." I have no clue how they can have no trinity and not have it be a zerg fest. This is SoE so I will give them a measure of trust. I will wait to see if they can do this without the trinity, 

    Link to his reply... HERE!

    =-D Only on a forum can optimism be called bad and pessimism the good thing =-D Welcome to the internet and forums. 


  • RydesonRydeson Canton, OHPosts: 3,852Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle

    I have to admit that after GW2 I thought I would never play another MMO without the trinity. I tweeted David Georgeson about it and he said "If you're not fond of GW2's combat, that's okay. It's not what we're building. You'll see, eventually." I have no clue how they can have no trinity and not have it be a zerg fest. This is SoE so I will give them a measure of trust. I will wait to see if they can do this without the trinity, 

    Link to his reply... HERE!

         Keep us posted on any new developments, since I don't follow this experiment SOE is promoting..  The more I hear, the more dancing I see..  I'm just wondering at this point if the EQN design here is that everyone can be everything (concerning roles), so people aren't waiting for a particular class role to become available..  This way David is correct in saying "there are roles" IF you wish to play it like that.. and NO trinity because everyone is self reliant..  We all saw where that leads in GW2..  I think once we see actual combat in video , and a list of various SKILLS and SPELLS available, we'll get a better picture.. 

  • Kevyne-ShandrisKevyne-Shandris Hephzibah, GAPosts: 1,946Member
    Originally posted by Rydeson
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle

    I have to admit that after GW2 I thought I would never play another MMO without the trinity. I tweeted David Georgeson about it and he said "If you're not fond of GW2's combat, that's okay. It's not what we're building. You'll see, eventually." I have no clue how they can have no trinity and not have it be a zerg fest. This is SoE so I will give them a measure of trust. I will wait to see if they can do this without the trinity, 

    Link to his reply... HERE!

         Keep us posted on any new developments, since I don't follow this experiment SOE is promoting..  The more I hear, the more dancing I see..  I'm just wondering at this point if the EQN design here is that everyone can be everything (concerning roles), so people aren't waiting for a particular class role to become available..  This way David is correct in saying "there are roles" IF you wish to play it like that.. and NO trinity because everyone is self reliant..  We all saw where that leads in GW2..  I think once we see actual combat in video , and a list of various SKILLS and SPELLS available, we'll get a better picture.. 

    Saw it in WoW too: challenge modes -- a healer is a loss of DPS, no invites.

     

    There's a reason why Battlefield didn't give Assault both the medic and ammo kits (why even have any other class, forget roles?). ^-^

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Posts: 6,296Member Rare
    Originally posted by Rydeson
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle

    I have to admit that after GW2 I thought I would never play another MMO without the trinity. I tweeted David Georgeson about it and he said "If you're not fond of GW2's combat, that's okay. It's not what we're building. You'll see, eventually." I have no clue how they can have no trinity and not have it be a zerg fest. This is SoE so I will give them a measure of trust. I will wait to see if they can do this without the trinity, 

    Link to his reply... HERE!

         Keep us posted on any new developments, since I don't follow this experiment SOE is promoting..  The more I hear, the more dancing I see..  I'm just wondering at this point if the EQN design here is that everyone can be everything (concerning roles), so people aren't waiting for a particular class role to become available..  This way David is correct in saying "there are roles" IF you wish to play it like that.. and NO trinity because everyone is self reliant..  We all saw where that leads in GW2..  I think once we see actual combat in video , and a list of various SKILLS and SPELLS available, we'll get a better picture.. 

    Everyone can be everything because when you make a char you can play almost every class with that char. You collect classes like cards. Doing some quest helping some tribe they teach you what it means to be a Shaman. Now you can level your Shaman skill line. Not sure if you can cross class skills but thats part of it. So you team, who wants to tank? Between everyone you should have what you need to make a working team. 

    There is no taunt but there is defensive skills. So you can play the tank role but not like in a classic trinity way. The details on how healing, dps and tanking in this game works is where David said we need to wait and see. This is what really makes me wonder if I want to play this game. Better be fricking awesome!

    =-D Only on a forum can optimism be called bad and pessimism the good thing =-D Welcome to the internet and forums. 


  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Posts: 6,296Member Rare
    Originally posted by Kevyne-Shandris
    Originally posted by Rydeson
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle

    I have to admit that after GW2 I thought I would never play another MMO without the trinity. I tweeted David Georgeson about it and he said "If you're not fond of GW2's combat, that's okay. It's not what we're building. You'll see, eventually." I have no clue how they can have no trinity and not have it be a zerg fest. This is SoE so I will give them a measure of trust. I will wait to see if they can do this without the trinity, 

    Link to his reply... HERE!

         Keep us posted on any new developments, since I don't follow this experiment SOE is promoting..  The more I hear, the more dancing I see..  I'm just wondering at this point if the EQN design here is that everyone can be everything (concerning roles), so people aren't waiting for a particular class role to become available..  This way David is correct in saying "there are roles" IF you wish to play it like that.. and NO trinity because everyone is self reliant..  We all saw where that leads in GW2..  I think once we see actual combat in video , and a list of various SKILLS and SPELLS available, we'll get a better picture.. 

    Saw it in WoW too: challenge modes -- a healer is a loss of DPS, no invites.

     

    There's a reason why Battlefield didn't give Assault both the medic and ammo kits (why even have any other class, forget roles?). ^-^

    Not quite. You can earn almost all the classes on one char. They are not sure if they will add restrictions like a good race being a necro. Or if by your actions in game will hinder you from earning x,y,z class. If I play this game, like I did in rift, I will work on having 1 of each of the roles on 1 char. I like options. 

    =-D Only on a forum can optimism be called bad and pessimism the good thing =-D Welcome to the internet and forums. 


  • dontadowdontadow Detroit, MIPosts: 992Member Uncommon

    Well everquest, now you've peeked my interest.  As previously mentioned, the trinity is lazy design. I was reading an ESO thread and someone summed it up nice when they said that in trinity combat you are just queing up a line of buttons for agro and such.

    I want to fight smart creatures. I want sophisticated AI.  Roles in battle are great, but let me figure out the role i need to play at that point. 

    I want the equivalent of a Dungeon Master AI.  As a DM, if the creature is perceptive and smart, he'll take out healers and damagers first. I want an AI who doesnt pull away from this.

    I love GW, but a good many, almost too many, of their bosses simply don't have smart AI. There are tricks to beating them. I want to have strategies and tactics to beat bosses, not a trick such as stacking in one area. 

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Posts: 6,296Member Rare
    Originally posted by dontadow

    Well everquest, now you've peeked my interest.  As previously mentioned, the trinity is lazy design. I was reading an ESO thread and someone summed it up nice when they said that in trinity combat you are just queing up a line of buttons for agro and such.

    I want to fight smart creatures. I want sophisticated AI.  Roles in battle are great, but let me figure out the role i need to play at that point. 

    I want the equivalent of a Dungeon Master AI.  As a DM, if the creature is perceptive and smart, he'll take out healers and damagers first. I want an AI who doesnt pull away from this.

    I love GW, but a good many, almost too many, of their bosses simply don't have smart AI. There are tricks to beating them. I want to have strategies and tactics to beat bosses, not a trick such as stacking in one area. 

    Thing is I have yet to see awesome AI in any MMO. Even ESO who said they had it, well...

    =-D Only on a forum can optimism be called bad and pessimism the good thing =-D Welcome to the internet and forums. 


  • Ender4Ender4 milwaukee, WIPosts: 2,247Member Uncommon

    The entire game is in the conceptual stage so yeah it is going to make a huge difference how things actually shake out. I mean combat in ESO is just boring, if they can't come up with smarter AI than that the game is doomed from the start.

  • IncomparableIncomparable KuwaitPosts: 913Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle

    I have to admit that after GW2 I thought I would never play another MMO without the trinity. I tweeted David Georgeson about it and he said "If you're not fond of GW2's combat, that's okay. It's not what we're building. You'll see, eventually." I have no clue how they can have no trinity and not have it be a zerg fest. This is SoE so I will give them a measure of trust. I will wait to see if they can do this without the trinity, 

    Link to his reply... HERE!

    Even the trinity can look like a zerg fest if there are a lot of characters on a map. It can also look like a stand still if healing can mitigate damage well enough as well, which imo is worse than a zerg fest but a stand off frozen in time.

    So what makes something like the trinity appealing, and how can something non-trinity fit the bill. Trinity is about class roles. The idea of class roles is important becuase something such as instances force atleast one healer, and one tank... I say at least becuase it is dependent on their gear for end game, and if their gear allows them, they could all be healers with enough dps to finish... but in raids in swtor with an enrage for the boss, it then becomes a race of dps and also pigeon holes ppl to play the raid build.

    So, hypotheically, small groups with or without trinity should fill in different group roles to complete boss fights. If there was no enrage timer for example, then it matters less about specific roles such as a tank/dps.

    So if there is an enrage timer in a boss fight, with a small group fighting... does it matter if they are trinity or not, when the group has to fill different roles to take down the boss?

    Then the question would be, what are those different roles? Damage mitigation or support roles can be seen as healing etc, so while it may not having something as specific as a healing class... it can have roles or classes which are very similar in creating that trinity dynamic... but at the same time avoid things in themepark mmos with trinities and making healers overly useful so ppl play healers. If healers simply just canceled out damage of the highest dps rotation, then ppl would not play healers. Trinity systems wants ppl to play healers and tanks and so they make them more useful. 

    If you want better class balance, then it begins by removing the trinity system.

    “Write bad things that are done to you in sand, but write the good things that happen to you on a piece of marble”

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Posts: 6,296Member Rare
    Originally posted by Ender4

    The entire game is in the conceptual stage so yeah it is going to make a huge difference how things actually shake out. I mean combat in ESO is just boring, if they can't come up with smarter AI than that the game is doomed from the start.

    They could also be doing Wushu rock paper scissors combat, where every move and a counter and weakness. This also would be a mistake. ESO AI is well... predictable and does not feel like anything new. I have not played EVE but someone said they are the only MMO that has made it huge without a trinity but I cant judge that as its not my type of game,

    =-D Only on a forum can optimism be called bad and pessimism the good thing =-D Welcome to the internet and forums. 


  • dontadowdontadow Detroit, MIPosts: 992Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by dontadow

    Well everquest, now you've peeked my interest.  As previously mentioned, the trinity is lazy design. I was reading an ESO thread and someone summed it up nice when they said that in trinity combat you are just queing up a line of buttons for agro and such.

    I want to fight smart creatures. I want sophisticated AI.  Roles in battle are great, but let me figure out the role i need to play at that point. 

    I want the equivalent of a Dungeon Master AI.  As a DM, if the creature is perceptive and smart, he'll take out healers and damagers first. I want an AI who doesnt pull away from this.

    I love GW, but a good many, almost too many, of their bosses simply don't have smart AI. There are tricks to beating them. I want to have strategies and tactics to beat bosses, not a trick such as stacking in one area. 

    Thing is I have yet to see awesome AI in any MMO. Even ESO who said they had it, well...

    Thus, they have peeked my interest. The solution that dissenters on here are saying is akin to saying stop trying to develop intersteller flight because it hasn't been done before.

    At some point, it has to be done, and if you keep making the same game, same combat, we'll never develop smarter AI.

    We know for a fact that smart AI exists, specifically in role playing games. Look at Dark Souls. The question is can you create algorythms that can mimic human behavior. 

    Also, can you make healing important without making it neccessary.  In Tabletop dnd (say waht you wish its the father of mmos, so to say you don't want it in your game is impossible), particlulary Pathfinder, Healing rarely happens in combat. It's nice to have a healer in combat, in case someone needs a quick burst of healing or a pick me up, but the bulk of healing occurs outside of combat.  In combat, a good much of healing occurs with potions and wands of cure light wounds. Combat is designed so that your max HP doesnt regenerate quickly.  Your max HP should be all you need to defeat a foe. This HP< without autoregeneration, has been withered down as you progressed in the dungeon. Healers are important ot heal you up before big battles, use status effects, and remove status effects provided. Healing takes on a different meaning in combat.

    What i'm saying is that, for 40 years, role playing games happened without a trinity and people loved them.  AT some point,  someone is going to be smart enough to replicate this feeling.

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Posts: 6,296Member Rare
    Originally posted by Incomparable
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle

    I have to admit that after GW2 I thought I would never play another MMO without the trinity. I tweeted David Georgeson about it and he said "If you're not fond of GW2's combat, that's okay. It's not what we're building. You'll see, eventually." I have no clue how they can have no trinity and not have it be a zerg fest. This is SoE so I will give them a measure of trust. I will wait to see if they can do this without the trinity, 

    Link to his reply... HERE!

    Even the trinity can look like a zerg fest if there are a lot of characters on a map. It can also look like a stand still if healing can mitigate damage well enough as well, which imo is worse than a zerg fest but a stand off frozen in time.

    So what makes something like the trinity appealing, and how can something non-trinity fit the bill. Trinity is about class roles. The idea of class roles is important becuase something such as instances force atleast one healer, and one tank... I say at least becuase it is dependent on their gear for end game, and if their gear allows them, they could all be healers with enough dps to finish... but in raids in swtor with an enrage for the boss, it then becomes a race of dps and also pigeon holes ppl to play the raid build.

    So, hypotheically, small groups with or without trinity should fill in different group roles to complete boss fights. If there was no enrage timer for example, then it matters less about specific roles such as a tank/dps.

    So if there is an enrage timer in a boss fight, with a small group fighting... does it matter if they are trinity or not, when the group has to fill different roles to take down the boss?

    Then the question would be, what are those different roles? Damage mitigation or support roles can be seen as healing etc, so while it may not having something as specific as a healing class... it can have roles or classes which are very similar in creating that trinity dynamic... but at the same time avoid things in themepark mmos with trinities and making healers overly useful so ppl play healers. If healers simply just canceled out damage of the highest dps rotation, then ppl would not play healers. Trinity systems wants ppl to play healers and tanks and so they make them more useful. 

    If you want better class balance, then it begins by removing the trinity system.

    Yes there has been bad games that made the trinity not much better then GW2 game play. Here is the point and its just this simple. Pile all the MMOs that had done well, WoW, Rift, SWToR, DAoC, EVE. The games that you can point too and say they have hundreds of thousands of players who play this game. How many have got there without the trinity? How many games have come up with a winning design that does not have the trinity? I only know one, EVE. Does SoE have something? The new games over the past few years who have tried to remove the trinity did not do a good job of it. Is it possible? Yes, EVE did it. But what is SoE building EQN to be? What system do they have to beat the trinity system. Thats what I want to really know. If its AI, then no one has pulled that off in MMOs. Love SoE, not sure on this myself.

    =-D Only on a forum can optimism be called bad and pessimism the good thing =-D Welcome to the internet and forums. 


  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Posts: 6,296Member Rare
    Originally posted by dontadow
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by dontadow

    Well everquest, now you've peeked my interest.  As previously mentioned, the trinity is lazy design. I was reading an ESO thread and someone summed it up nice when they said that in trinity combat you are just queing up a line of buttons for agro and such.

    I want to fight smart creatures. I want sophisticated AI.  Roles in battle are great, but let me figure out the role i need to play at that point. 

    I want the equivalent of a Dungeon Master AI.  As a DM, if the creature is perceptive and smart, he'll take out healers and damagers first. I want an AI who doesnt pull away from this.

    I love GW, but a good many, almost too many, of their bosses simply don't have smart AI. There are tricks to beating them. I want to have strategies and tactics to beat bosses, not a trick such as stacking in one area. 

    Thing is I have yet to see awesome AI in any MMO. Even ESO who said they had it, well...

    Thus, they have peeked my interest. The solution that dissenters on here are saying is akin to saying stop trying to develop intersteller flight because it hasn't been done before.

    At some point, it has to be done, and if you keep making the same game, same combat, we'll never develop smarter AI.

    We know for a fact that smart AI exists, specifically in role playing games. Look at Dark Souls. The question is can you create algorythms that can mimic human behavior. 

    Also, can you make healing important without making it neccessary.  In Tabletop dnd (say waht you wish its the father of mmos, so to say you don't want it in your game is impossible), particlulary Pathfinder, Healing rarely happens in combat. It's nice to have a healer in combat, in case someone needs a quick burst of healing or a pick me up, but the bulk of healing occurs outside of combat.  In combat, a good much of healing occurs with potions and wands of cure light wounds. Combat is designed so that your max HP doesnt regenerate quickly.  Your max HP should be all you need to defeat a foe. This HP< without autoregeneration, has been withered down as you progressed in the dungeon. Healers are important ot heal you up before big battles, use status effects, and remove status effects provided. Healing takes on a different meaning in combat.

    What i'm saying is that, for 40 years, role playing games happened without a trinity and people loved them.  AT some point,  someone is going to be smart enough to replicate this feeling.

    SoE is acting like that have something new never been done before, I hope they do. I just think its unlikely as I have heard this promised to many times. But I will check it out and hope they are right =-)

    =-D Only on a forum can optimism be called bad and pessimism the good thing =-D Welcome to the internet and forums. 


  • dontadowdontadow Detroit, MIPosts: 992Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by dontadow
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by dontadow

    Well everquest, now you've peeked my interest.  As previously mentioned, the trinity is lazy design. I was reading an ESO thread and someone summed it up nice when they said that in trinity combat you are just queing up a line of buttons for agro and such.

    I want to fight smart creatures. I want sophisticated AI.  Roles in battle are great, but let me figure out the role i need to play at that point. 

    I want the equivalent of a Dungeon Master AI.  As a DM, if the creature is perceptive and smart, he'll take out healers and damagers first. I want an AI who doesnt pull away from this.

    I love GW, but a good many, almost too many, of their bosses simply don't have smart AI. There are tricks to beating them. I want to have strategies and tactics to beat bosses, not a trick such as stacking in one area. 

    Thing is I have yet to see awesome AI in any MMO. Even ESO who said they had it, well...

    Thus, they have peeked my interest. The solution that dissenters on here are saying is akin to saying stop trying to develop intersteller flight because it hasn't been done before.

    At some point, it has to be done, and if you keep making the same game, same combat, we'll never develop smarter AI.

    We know for a fact that smart AI exists, specifically in role playing games. Look at Dark Souls. The question is can you create algorythms that can mimic human behavior. 

    Also, can you make healing important without making it neccessary.  In Tabletop dnd (say waht you wish its the father of mmos, so to say you don't want it in your game is impossible), particlulary Pathfinder, Healing rarely happens in combat. It's nice to have a healer in combat, in case someone needs a quick burst of healing or a pick me up, but the bulk of healing occurs outside of combat.  In combat, a good much of healing occurs with potions and wands of cure light wounds. Combat is designed so that your max HP doesnt regenerate quickly.  Your max HP should be all you need to defeat a foe. This HP< without autoregeneration, has been withered down as you progressed in the dungeon. Healers are important ot heal you up before big battles, use status effects, and remove status effects provided. Healing takes on a different meaning in combat.

    What i'm saying is that, for 40 years, role playing games happened without a trinity and people loved them.  AT some point,  someone is going to be smart enough to replicate this feeling.

    SoE is acting like that have something new never been done before, I hope they do. I just think its unlikely as I have heard this promised to many times. But I will check it out and hope they are right =-)

    Hey buddy we're both brides left at the alter. Every game i look at has some major flaw that prevents me from wanting to get engrossed. I would accept 10 years of an mmo with a great AI even if that AI eventually led to skynet.

  • Ender4Ender4 milwaukee, WIPosts: 2,247Member Uncommon


    Pile all the MMOs that had done well, WoW, Rift, SWToR, DAoC, EVE. The games that you can point too and say they have hundreds of thousands of players who play this game. How many have got there without the trinity? How many games have come up with a winning design that does not have the trinity?

    That is an odd list since Rift and SWToR more or less failed and went F2P and DAoC PvE is awful. GW2 is more successful than almost all of those games were. UO didn't have a trinity and that game thrived. EQ actually didn't have the trinity either. There were pullers, CC, Debuffers, DPS, Healers, Tanks and off Tanks, all were very important.

    The trinity really describes WoW and games like it where one tank could stick a mob to him forever and be healed by one healer and the rest can just be asleep doing DPS. That is an awful design for a game.

  • dontadowdontadow Detroit, MIPosts: 992Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Ender4

     


    Pile all the MMOs that had done well, WoW, Rift, SWToR, DAoC, EVE. The games that you can point too and say they have hundreds of thousands of players who play this game. How many have got there without the trinity? How many games have come up with a winning design that does not have the trinity?

     

    That is an odd list since Rift and SWToR more or less failed and went F2P and DAoC PvE is awful. GW2 is more successful than almost all of those games were. UO didn't have a trinity and that game thrived. EQ actually didn't have the trinity either. There were pullers, CC, Debuffers, DPS, Healers, Tanks and off Tanks, all were very important.

    The trinity really describes WoW and games like it where one tank could stick a mob to him forever and be healed by one healer and the rest can just be asleep doing DPS. That is an awful design for a game.

    I miss that design that had 6 or 7 different roles.  By the example u quoted, we'd never have a game that wasna't pong, because hey before that what game was successful without having two paddles and a dot. AT some point you need to attempt an innovation, even if you fail it.

    I remembe thinking when i played GW2 for the first time that this was only the first start. This was the original GTA. Wait until the third one comes around.

  • Ender4Ender4 milwaukee, WIPosts: 2,247Member Uncommon

    I think you meant the guy I was quoting but yeah that is a good point. Successful games have done X is not a reason why Y won't work.

  • Kevyne-ShandrisKevyne-Shandris Hephzibah, GAPosts: 1,946Member
    Originally posted by Incomparable
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle

    I have to admit that after GW2 I thought I would never play another MMO without the trinity. I tweeted David Georgeson about it and he said "If you're not fond of GW2's combat, that's okay. It's not what we're building. You'll see, eventually." I have no clue how they can have no trinity and not have it be a zerg fest. This is SoE so I will give them a measure of trust. I will wait to see if they can do this without the trinity, 

    Link to his reply... HERE!

    Even the trinity can look like a zerg fest if there are a lot of characters on a map. It can also look like a stand still if healing can mitigate damage well enough as well, which imo is worse than a zerg fest but a stand off frozen in time.

    Naw, it' fun making DPS cry in their cups when arena matches lasted 45mins (bet some folks were throwing keyboards that they couldn't faceroll).

     

    Now? They whine if it lasts 2 minutes, and they sure aren't Muhammad Ali!

1568101115
Sign In or Register to comment.