Howdy, Stranger!

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

Trinity vs. Non-Trinity

1246710

Comments

  • velmaxvelmax Member UncommonPosts: 224
    Originally posted by TyranusPrime

    So, one of the primary topics now seems to be the lack of a trinity (or possible lack of it) for EQNext.. It wasn't very long ago that a great number of people (many of them being tired of WoW's mechanics) were screaming and yelling about being rid of the trinity all together.. This discontent seemed to almost directly spawn the genesis of GW2, which many heralded as amazing for its lack of trinity.. But now, hilariously enough, EQNext's not-too-clear stance on the trinity has brought out throngs of trinity-loving statements all over the place..

     

    So.. If you were able to discuss the trinity with the next generation of game developers, what would you say? Where do you stand on the whole trinity issue.. Are you for it? Against it?

    I would tell a DEV to build their game around the idea of not needing a role, GW2 was not build around that idea, thats why that aspect failed.

    Also in a couple of videos the EQN devs are clear of the non-trininty system not working in other games, but EQN will work without needing the trinity. (Well we hope it works)

  • VolmokVolmok Member UncommonPosts: 64

    People bash GW2 for not having the trinity, but never stop to think that maybe the lack of the classic trinity is not the issue.

    I for one like the concept of a new trinity as it brings diversity in this genre, but I cannot stop to think that maybe the dungeons and PvE encounters could have been done differently and allow the new roles to group better.

    Now, I am not a game designer like so many on these forums; I am a senior developer on different type of software and I know that having multiple goals hurts a software and giving in to client pressure most of the time results in a bad product. Most game companies should focus on one aspect for the release and add the others down the road; what I am talking about here is PvP and PvE aspects. GW2 designers chased 3 rabbits and got 3 rats instead: PvE, sPvP and WvWvW, and I am sorry to say that they did not get any right and the numbers of players show this. I haven't played GW2 in 5 months because the new trinity system alone is not able to keep me playing.

    I only hope that EQNext will do things smarter and not give in to the player mass, instead listen to their ideas and adopt only those that fit in their original designs; also I hope that players will once and for all stop speculating and stop getting over-enthusiastic about a game so long before launch and instead wait for beta/video/etc before throwing dirt at a game or defend it valiantly before launch and after talk trash about it.

     

    V.

  • Berserker_RageBerserker_Rage Member Posts: 5

    I find it rather funny when people say the trinity makes people coordinate and promotes social aspects.  Has anyone run LFD in most games?  Have you? Because if you did you know there is very little interaction between players.  Everyone is doing there own thing as well.  You get a simple "Hi, hello, hey" sometimes and ready checks for the boss.  Then a quick good-bye or GG.

    The trinity also plagues guilds and raids.  How many times have you logged in to raid to find out X number of tanks or X healers aren't online and they have to cancel raids tonight?  This happens enough people start to exodus a guild and move on because they can't do what they love.

    SoE says their AI is very intelligent and they can scale it up or down as they please.  This will eliminate the requirement for the trinity.  A raid mob isn't dumb enough to attack one person while the rest of the dps is destroying it.  Of course we haven't seen the AI in action, so we can't really tell what the AI is going to do in these situations, but at least its a step forward instead of backwards.  Using the same old mechanics from 15 years ago is a sure way of making the next EQ/WoW clone and that's not what SoE wants to to do with EQ:N, they want forward thinking.

  • MMOExposedMMOExposed Member RarePosts: 7,387
    Originally posted by stayBlind
    Originally posted by ropenice
    Or

     

    Absolutely. Giving everyone in a group the tools to Control mobs, mitigate damage, heal a little bit and still do damage brings a much more dynamic and interactive group scenario, why would you need any one person in the group to fill one specific task. The trinity is highly restrictive and very boring where non trinity group play is more about coordination a tactics. In my opinion Teamwork exists more in a non trinity system.

    Not sure I see how non-trin is better teamwork. In a trinity (or 4rinity with cc), everyone has to depend on each other or it falls apart. You can't just dps everything and resurrect the people who die and keep going. Even the dps has to control how much damage he does to not draw agro (and if he does healer has to adjust or cc save him, tank has to re-engage mob). Non-trin seems to be everyone out for self, all able to defend/dodge or heal themselves. Not saying trinity is perfect (it could use improvement to make more dynamic, but it does foster more teamwork-group usually wiped if people not good at their role. I believe non-trin could work well if improved upon to create some dependency on each other, or maybe some type of combining parts of both ideas, like giving more classes ability to do other roles to support each other-backup healer with dps, or wizzie that could buff self temporarily to help tank, or other-should  be possible in EQN since they will have multiclassing skills (i think i read that.)

    'The tank re-engaging' is handled in such a boring way though. It is so predictable it becomes boring.

     

    Tanks do not use taunt mechanics in PVP, why should they be forced to use them in PVE?

    What are you talking about. People use taunts in PvP all the time. What you think Teabagging is?

    Philosophy of MMO Game Design

  • BladestromBladestrom Member UncommonPosts: 5,001
    Trinity is fun to play, but it has issues that we have uncovered over the years that has highlighted huge weaknesses in the model. those same weaknesses also prevent the model from evolving - if it can't evolve it has to go or stagnate.

    Weaknesses.

    You 'need' to have certain raid compositions.

    You cannot dynamically scale while maintaining a degree of difficulty E.g do you balance for 2 tanks and 20 dps, or 10 tank, dps race = stack pure dps, but balance for average composition etc etc.

    Some roles are less attractive.

    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

  • stevebombsquadstevebombsquad Member UncommonPosts: 884
    Double Post

    James T. Kirk: All she's got isn't good enough! What else ya got?

  • MothanosMothanos Member UncommonPosts: 1,910

    If i can switch to a healer or tank on the fly when i want and do my job then its no problem.
    But it seems that this isnt the case, no trinity means sub par class roles as in all dps with a few heals or ohshit grab aggro button on longer cooldowns.

    GW2 was extremely fun when i started it but by the time i dinged 80 i was in shock and extremely missed my healers and tanks.

    They need to clear up the smoke and tell wtf it is, all this peculation isnt good.
    They had a presentation and so far i am left with many questions and most things ive seen are seriously lacking.

    There are epic features in EQN, no doubt about it, but it felt EQN wasnt even close to be showcased.....

  • stevebombsquadstevebombsquad Member UncommonPosts: 884
    Originally posted by stevebombsquad
    Originally posted by fyerwall
    Originally posted by stevebombsquad
    Originally posted by fyerwall

    2) I have raided, and I have been in progression guilds in the past. The reason why I don't anymore, is because the time commitment is too much. Given my career I can't afford to have a 2nd weekly job

    The 'difficulty' wasn't in the combat. It was in getting every on the same page (organizing the group), and in learning the boss mechanics. I don't honestly think anyone believes otherwise. This isn't to say that I've never been challenged (some of the fights in vanilla FFXI & WoW were rough), but it had nothing to do w/ it being a trinity game. Most of the time it was due to gear or a first run through learning the mechanics.

    There is a huge difference in people that can play their classes and play them well and people who can't. There are lots of people that can't hack it in a progression raiding guild simply because of this. They cause the party to wipe. It does beyond the footwork and memorizing the patterns. Reacting to situations when things go wrong, managing things like mana for healers, DPS being able to control the damage at just the right level so that they don't draw aggro but maximized enough to burn down the health properly. Vanilla WoW  through BC had plenty of tough raids that required people to really work together. To say that a game like GW2 has anything comparable is just ludicrous. 

     

     

    Thing is, this is only true if the person telling the story wants it to be true. Raiding in WoW was pretty damned easy. It was all pretty much Have the right gear, Have the right classes, Learn the dance, stay awake and hope the lag didn't get you. The only raid I can think of that was a pain was when we first entered Sunwell - But by then most of us were bored of the raid game and the quest for loot.

    As far as having people who could raid effectively, I agree. There are some people who don't have the reactions or the attention spans to raid in a hardcore raid guild. And after a while I actually started to see things from their point of view. Every raid was the same - Learn the strat, memorize the positions. Hit the button, move to the left to avoid aoe. Hit the button several more times, run to the wall, count to 10 to avoid the nuke and run back into range to continue hitting your rotations. Rinse/repeat. You know it got bad when you were getting praise for being an awesome healer because everyone lived, meanwhile they had no idea you were watching TV the whole time and just keeping rhythm/timing by tapping your foot (tap, tap, tap, tap, heal, tap, tap, tap, cleanse...).

    As for GW2, the reason it didn't have something comparable is because the devs made sure it didn't. SOE knows people like to raid, they know people like the bigger group picture. I doubt they will be a foolish as Anet was in this regard.

    Nice try, but not really though. You might want to apply what you wrote to your 1337 self....... 

    So I am leet now because I don't agree with your opinion and instead found that once you learned the dance raids became boring? I guess punching wholes in your reasoning might have warrented this /shrug

    No not really. You punched no holes in any argument. I could write down a wall of factless text and call it true and refuse to be reasonable too. Does that mean that I win? There are countless posts referencing this on many threads throughout these forums as we speak. You can't argue with someone who can't formulate an argument beyond their own "so called experience". If you actually had done those raids and healed through them you would know different. So in reality it is  pointless arguing with a person who isn't talking about reality......

     

    James T. Kirk: All she's got isn't good enough! What else ya got?

  • IncomparableIncomparable Member UncommonPosts: 1,138

    People who refer to loaded terminology to say what they want in not so many words, actually do not know what they want, or did not articulate what they wanted.

     

    Trinity is a loaded term. Its a label and a category with a certain aspect that defines the trinity, and its class roles.

     

    However, what anyone wants is fun combat. But instead of saying i want combat to be easy, dynamic, balanced or whatever issue or joy of combat they generalize it to trinity or not trinity.

     

    Stop derailing discussions and using generalizations. Its not useful, and especially not helping to get what you want.

     

    Since i could argue that the trinity exists in EQN by them simply having class roles.

     

    I am not sure if people are just angry and negative and want to watch the world burn, or in their attempt to get what they want they add obscurity to what is fun combat.

     

    Well, what us fun combat. Can you say it without using the word trinity? I believe you will find yourself realizing that EQN might have what you want.

     

    However, they are marketing against the trinity system. Yet that seems contradictory to theorycrafting that EQN has class roles. Maybe by no trinity, they mean content will not force healers to be in a group, or even a tank. Does that mean content is easier, difficult, different? Well we dont know, but the A.I. is intelligent, and the combat can feel as distinguished as the roles of a trinity.

     

    Again, using trinity vs non trinity, are loaded terms which are not even clearly defined. 

     

    What is the difference between trinity and non trinity? And what would you like from either, or neither?

     

    Thats a real question.

     

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

  • AntariousAntarious Member UncommonPosts: 2,834

    Personally I don't really know why all this Trinity or lack of it.. discussion started.

     

    They said there are 8 "starter" classes in EQN and they told us what 2 of them are...

     

    So out of the 6 classes left (to start off with) there might be a healer or two.   Druid, Shaman and Cleric have always been in EQ...

     

    They also discussed that there are at least 40 classes total in the game.

     

    So we have no idea at the current time and won't know "for sure" until SOE decides to reveal more.   Tho I personally would believe that one of the 6 unrevealed starter classes is a druid... and some of the other 40 classes mentioned would be as well.

     

    To be honest I'm kind of surprised there hasn't been more threads about the 8 ability slots... than worrying about the trinity.

  • ZinzanZinzan Member UncommonPosts: 1,351

    Trinty, non-trinity...

    As long as the game requires players regardless of class to co-operate best achieve objectives, im happy.

    As long as there isn't one rediculously overly powerful class that can solo everything, im happy.

    As long as there is no "must have" class for a group, im happy.

    As long as players who enjoy playing support classes can do so and provide equal benefit to a group compared to any other class or class type (and vice-versa), im happy.

    As long as every single class is viable and desirable in a group and there is no "Your xxx class, we don't want you, we want yyy class", im happy.

    Still, I can't think of a single game that can tick all these boxes and i don't expect EQN to do so either.

     

    Expresso gave me a Hearthstone beta key.....I'm so happy :)

  • MardyMardy Member Posts: 2,213
    Originally posted by Antarious

    To be honest I'm kind of surprised there hasn't been more threads about the 8 ability slots... than worrying about the trinity.

     

    That has been talked about almost as much as the trinity vs non-trinity discussion.  It's used often in discussions and debates.  Both trinity and ability slots have to do with combat, and combat is certainly one of the most talked about as people are quite wary about what they've heard so far....and the severe lack of information SOE is willing to give out.  They just keep saying everything will be fine, but at the same time keep saying things aren't finalized.

    EQ1-AC1-DAOC-FFXI-L2-EQ2-WoW-DDO-GW-LoTR-VG-WAR-GW2-ESO

  • RydesonRydeson Member UncommonPosts: 3,852
    Originally posted by Mardy
    Originally posted by Antarious

    To be honest I'm kind of surprised there hasn't been more threads about the 8 ability slots... than worrying about the trinity.

     

    That has been talked about almost as much as the trinity vs non-trinity discussion.  It's used often in discussions and debates.  Both trinity and ability slots have to do with combat, and combat is certainly one of the most talked about as people are quite wary about what they've heard so far....and the severe lack of information SOE is willing to give out.  They just keep saying everything will be fine, but at the same time keep saying things aren't finalized.

         I"m not sure what to make of it.. To me it actually sounds worse then GW2.. At least with GW2 you are given 5 slots for weapons make up.. (2 for primary, 1 for combo, and 2 for offhand).. unless you're using a 2 handed weapon, then it's just simple 5.. What I gather from EQ Next is that there are only 4, (not 5) buttons based on weapon choices.. Don't see how that is an upgrade, it actually sounds worse then GW2

         Then EQ Next has 4 buttons for "character" skills.. While GW2 uses 5 based on skills points.. Again 5 sounds better then 4.. Sure you can learn many skills from unlocking various classes,, but you can only pick 4 of the "allowable" type at any one time.. And I'm sure EQN is not going to allow you to exchange skills out without restrictions..  If it smells like GW2, and looks like GW2, I'm sure it will play like GW2, just with less buttons.. 

  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,536
    Originally posted by Bladestrom
    Trinity is fun to play, but it has issues that we have uncovered over the years that has highlighted huge weaknesses in the model. those same weaknesses also prevent the model from evolving - if it can't evolve it has to go or stagnate.

    Weaknesses.

    You 'need' to have certain raid compositions.

    You cannot dynamically scale while maintaining a degree of difficulty E.g do you balance for 2 tanks and 20 dps, or 10 tank, dps race = stack pure dps, but balance for average composition etc etc.

    Some roles are less attractive.

    I have to say the drawbacks on the traditional role system being presented in the panels and here are straw dummy arguments.

    Sorry, but if you design your game right, you don't get "stuck" with not having a main tank.  If you have multiple viable tank classes, this isn't even an issue.  People are looking back to original Everquest where only the warrior would suffice as the main tank, but ultimately that was a problem that could easily be circumvented today.

    If you have multiple viable healer, dps, support and tank classes that can fill the role of the main tank, then those excuses aren't even valid.  

    It would be MUCH easier to keep the traditional role system and spruce it up with emergent AI than it is to throw the baby out with the bathwater.  If you're going to make up stupid strawdummy arguments, they should at least make them believable excuses that don't insult my intelligence.  The problems of old with say, Everquest 1, where the role system was VERY strict can easily be worked around today.


  • RydesonRydeson Member UncommonPosts: 3,852
    Originally posted by Dullahan
    Originally posted by Bladestrom
    Trinity is fun to play, but it has issues that we have uncovered over the years that has highlighted huge weaknesses in the model. those same weaknesses also prevent the model from evolving - if it can't evolve it has to go or stagnate.

    Weaknesses.

    You 'need' to have certain raid compositions.

    You cannot dynamically scale while maintaining a degree of difficulty E.g do you balance for 2 tanks and 20 dps, or 10 tank, dps race = stack pure dps, but balance for average composition etc etc.

    Some roles are less attractive.

    I have to say the drawbacks on the traditional role system being presented in the panels and here are straw dummy arguments.

    Sorry, but if you design your game right, you don't get "stuck" with not having a main tank.  If you have multiple viable tank classes, this isn't even an issue.  People are looking back to original Everquest where only the warrior would suffice as the main tank, but ultimately that was a problem that could easily be circumvented today.

    If you have multiple viable healer, dps, support and tank classes that can fill the role of the main tank, then those excuses aren't even valid.  

    It would be MUCH easier to keep the traditional role system and spruce it up with emergent AI than it is to throw the baby out with the bathwater.  If you're going to make up stupid strawdummy arguments, they should at least make them believable excuses that don't insult my intelligence.  The problems of old with say, Everquest 1, where the role system was VERY strict can easily be worked around today.

         I highlighted the part I really wanted to address and something I have said for years.. The lack of tanks, isn't a class problem, it was a design problem caused BY the devs.. With the restrictions of running dungeons and raids, it was next to impossible to gear up EVERY single tank prospect..  I played a holy pally in WoW and it was a task just to gear up my healing spec, let alone think about grabbing tanking gear.. There just wasn't enough TIME to do both.. This isn't the Pally's fault, or the players fault, it was the GAMES fault brought on by the devs..  IF those restrictions were lifted, and or enough crafting gear was made, every Pally would of been good to go.. OH better yet.. NOT require multiple sets of gear to begin with.. Gearing up in WoW as with other games are only timesinks..

         So the strawman argument that there wasn't enough tanks or healers to go around.. It wasn't the fault of the trinity, it was the fault of BAD implementation .. 

  • dtdavidsondtdavidson Member Posts: 6

    From what I have read most people seem to confuse the terms class and role. To me, class just means a collection of skills, combined with what armor and weapon I can use and it's given a name. A role is determined by the group I have joined, whether that be a cloth wearer who is taking all the damage because I am the most suited, or the plate wearer dealing damage because I have made it my goal to become that.

     

    Personally I am a Trinity fan, but can see why non trinity fans love that style. But to me teamwork means knowing your place in a team, knowing your roles and responsibilities. Knowing that if you cannot carry out your defined role within a team, then the team may fail.

     

    In a non trinity game, this is removed, as if I fail in a group, having no defined role, the group may very well complete the task without me. But in a trinity, say i'm a healer, if I fail in my task as the main healer, the group fails. To me that's teamwork. Relying on each other to perform a job.

     

    I'll use a somewhat far fetched analogy. does the military, in any service or nation, train all their soldiers in the intricacies of all aspects of warfare? I'm talking spec ops, logistics, Intel, armoured warfare, etc. No they don't, they may train the very basics but not enough to be proficient in everything. I know it's a massive stretch but I feel the same with MMO roles.

     

    I feel a massive sense of accomplishment when I have done my job well, as a healer, when we finish a zone. And when I save someone's life on the battlefield!! I know they are not the same but that feeling of belonging to a team, being part of a team and accomplishing a goal is missing in non trinity games. I know that the grunts are fighting harder, taking bigger risks, knowing that a descent medic has got their back when the shit hits the fan, and tbh I think it's kinda the same in trinity mmo's.

     

    With no one having a defined role, no one having your back in an mmo, there's no teamwork, no one to rely on when things go pearshaped. no one saying, I got your back, go hard!! but maybe that's just me!!

  • DracockDracock Member Posts: 75

    The combat system in relation to the trinity will go one of three ways:

    1. The skeptics are right and the combat is chaotic and zerg oriented (although I hear there actually is difficult PvE content in GW2 atm). Leaving no sense of teamwork. Or perhaps DPS characters will be disproportionately powerful compared to Tanks and Support.
    2. The skeptics are wrong and the Devs has managed to create AI that rewards all rolls equally. Encounters will require communication, strategy, and teamwork. People are able to adjust their abilities if their group lacks certain classes. 
    3. The Devs are BSing about the trinity not being required. All of the hard encounters will require a balance of Tank, DPS, and Support classes. It is all the more face roll content that will need no Tanky or Support classes.
    Most likely #3 IMO.
  • splongsplong Member UncommonPosts: 15

    first sorry for my bad english.

    From what I understand, there are Trinity (or some similar system).

    quote from devs.:

    Jeff Butler

    It’s not to say that we are walking away from roles and it’s certainly not to say we are walking away from responsibility, both personal strategic and tactical responsibility….

    I think some people are confused between no dedicated ROLE and no dedicated CHARACTER. Action combat didn't means no dedicated ROLE.

  • Four0SixFour0Six Member UncommonPosts: 1,175

     

    I hail from a large but low population state in the US. Montana to be exact. We sport just around 1 million residents. Since we have such a low population and only maybe 5 "cities" many of the schools are quite small. This correlates to their small communities. I for example graduated with 300 classmates from my school in the state capital, while my wife graduated with 15 classmates at her school, in a small agriculture community.

    Sports are still a big deal in ALL the schools, mostly "American Football", and basketball. Here is the thing though. In many of the small school districts they play a different version. They play "7 man", and not with 11 players on each side of the ball. Many times the "7-man" games are more fun to watch and may even be more dynamic. But they rarely have the level of precision you see when a game is played with 11.   

    My observations concerning the "trinity" are along the same lines. I have a background in City of Heroes, not the memes of fantasy MMO play. I learned to play against mobs of 8, 10, or more NPCs. Not single mobs. This playstyle required a more elaborate system of management. You needed more than "tank, heals, dps". You need CC and buff/debuff. There was also enough "freedom" to build groups that could overcome requirements yet still be effective.

    When looking at the trinity, most see it only as it's "lowest common denominator", the 3. So when looking for a solution, often the choice of "throw it out" is the one made. Why not expand it? Why not make it into a "Pentity" of a "Hexity"?

     

    Shot answer, " We don't want to have to look for class X or Y. We just want to go go go go go." The minority now is the player(s) who want to have to think and be aware and dynamic. (No I do not believe the dodge mechanic achieves this, since it is only DPS-dodge-DPs-dodge-DPS-dodge. "I can hop all over the place. but I still am hopping. Now if you add a skip and a jump we might have something.)

     

  • PAL-18PAL-18 Member UncommonPosts: 844

    Football without ,defenders,goalkeepers and midfielders sounds pretty boring.

    So yes to trinity.

     

    So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
    **On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **

  • AldersAlders Member RarePosts: 2,207

    Those stating there was no strategy in dungeons in GW2 obviously didn't play in very good groups.  Class and skill selection, along with cross class combos make the content night and day.

    The problem lies with the fact that a lot of players are honestly bad.  They're used to being carried by good tanks and healers and are unable to adapt to anything regarding their own safety.  Why bother when they're just used to blaming the healer?

    Ironically, as a Guardian, I'm used to not only healing and keeping the entire group alive, but i also tank everything while dps'ing.  This is extremely fun and rewarding in great groups but an absolute stress inducing nightmare in bad pick up groups.  Again, this goes back to your fellow teammates building themselves properly based on other players in the group.

     

    All that being said, i miss and prefer the trinity.  I think it's a huge mistake for EQ to go away from it at this time.

  • RydesonRydeson Member UncommonPosts: 3,852
    Going from trinity to action combat is like going from US football to Rugby..... In US Football we have designated roles QB, RB, WR, etc etc.. If any of those roles are taken out, the team fails (generally speaking).. But in Rugby it's just a bunch of men running around playing keep away.. That is not to say it's not difficult, but there is little strategy needed to play Rugby..
  • sfc1971sfc1971 Member UncommonPosts: 421

    I play GW2 somewhat actively but while it is a decent hack&slash it lacks the challenge/depth of what I would call a true multi-player game in that how an individual behaves has very little impact on how you play.

    Take healing, most enemies hits are so off the charts that you can spend an entire group battle not getting hit once and others you are insta killed or reduced to a sliver you got no option but to rely on your own emergency heal or just you know, die.

    And in world events, you can't even see how others are doing, so I just pop my group heals based on random guessing or because I saw the enemy do a high damage attack. But if I don't... the game continues. I have played my hunter both AFK (just auto-attack) AND highly active with rushing to pop healing well for the melee, choosing a support pet and the difference is non-existent.

    This ain't just the effect of the zerg rush during popular events it is the entire mechanic of play.

    Take agro, usually the first to agro a mob keeps it unless someone start to really hit a lot harder. This kinda sucks on a  champion when you attack with a light armor, then the mob scales up as more people arrive and you are now just endlessly circle strafing. In the same vein,  when someone is in trouble, I can't just pull agro and save the day.

    There is no room for heroics anymore. 

    EQN having just 8 skills sounds worrysome to me. That is significantly less then GW2 has (5*2 weapon skills + 5 skills + whatever your class has).

    Weapon skills in GW2 already are far to specific (a blocking skill? nice but I am often not even being hit) and with way to long cooldowns to be used tactically yet to generic to demand strategy. I played just randomly hitting whatever was available and did just as well as when I tried to think.

    It is enjoyable for a short while every so often but it isn't on the edge of your set, epic do or die stuff. 

    The problem is that GW2 fullfills my needs in this regard. So why would I switch for a game that doesn't offer anything different? It is the reason all the wow-clones failed. If people want to play game X, why would they settle for clone Y when original X is available?

    Don't copy games, make something original and fun. So far I think EQN is WAAAAY to vague when the game is suppoed to launch pretty soon.

    The most worrying thing? The changing landscape... what... in a "persistent" world? How many seconds until every building lies in rubble? Oh the world repairs itself. You mean like GW2 where after an event you better run or you will be caught in the world resetting itself a split second after an event? GW2 got a LOT of flag when its world events turned out to be little more then endlessly looping scripted events.

    The problem is that in a MMO, there are so many people with zero lives that any content will end up consumed in hours even if it takes a month of production.

    See my screenshot of GW2 dragon wings, bought for a few gold just days in, gold I had in my account for months following the sale of a really ugly skin. Complete walkthoughs are up before content is out.

    I saw that movie with the giant golem destroying the house, how many seconds later will the house reset itself? Or will people have to queue EQ2 style for quest spawns?

  • NavinJohnsonNavinJohnson Member Posts: 60
    Originally posted by Neo_Liberty
    Originally posted by Kiyoris
    Originally posted by Traugar
    Originally posted by Kiyoris

    Trinity is the best system so far still for me. I think it also slows gameplay down a bit so you can add strategy.

    When I play non-trinity games you are constantly rushing mobs and it becomes a free for all faceroll game.

    A group in a non-trinity game doesn't feel like a group, it feels like button mashing solo game, your group members might not even be there.

    Also no one talks in non-trinity games, everyone is too busy facerolling mobs.

    What trinity games are you playing where people aren't rushing the mobs, and take the time to use strategy?  I haven't seen one in years.  I think the last one I played like that was EQ2 at launch.  Too bad they didn't keep it that way.  

    Well EQ. You never rush mobs there.

    And in the trinity games where you do rush like in Rift, the rush is still much slower than in non-trinity games. The game speed is slowed down.

    You are right that most game are now rush games..........but games now have little community now and very bad raids too.

    Well, just my opinion.

    I think i'm starting to understand.. it seems it's just a difference in mentality.... those who like trinity.. might prefer gameplay similar to rts style play.. you feel like you are a general or the king on the battle field.. you don't really get involved you just supervise the battle...

    those who don't want the trinity... are those who want to be in the middle of the battle experiencing the action for themselves... fighting on the front lines is a lot different from coordinating the attacks and retreats..

    This ^.

    There are folks who enjoy managing the group/encounters: Here are the classes I want. Here are the players I want. Here is what I want you to do. Here is what you will do. Nothing wrong with that, to each their own.  But, It's nice to play something different also.

    Also, I keep seeing the common assertion that trinity structures bring structure to combat. Only problem is, the combat is already structured (scripted). So what I'm really hearing is, "I uncomfortable palying a game in which combat scripts cannot be memorized." 

    One thing the SOE developers keep saying over and over again is that trinitiy structures are just silly within a wise AI system, because the whole point is that mobs will adjust strategy and tactics based on what they see us doing.  Well, this is aside from the fact having one dude stand in front of the mob hurling insults while 3 to 5 healers dumps heals on him and everyone else nukes the crap out of the mob is really kind of silly on it's own.

    There is plenty of room for tactics and strategies within games with multiclassing and action combat. There are also still roles, and if anything, a group of good cooperative players will be even more important than it was before. The only difference is, now folks are also going to have be more creative, do more than simply study parsers to extract the script, and have everyone target through the tank and start mashing buttons.

    Is the trinity more structured? Of course it is. Is it interesting? Not really.

     

  • WarlyxWarlyx Member EpicPosts: 3,361

    trinity all the way , the boss encounter scripts w/o trinity are boring

     

    but oh well... with 8 skills only.....the bosses are going to be boring , no matter trinity or not

Sign In or Register to comment.