Howdy, Stranger!

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

"The holy trinity came about because of primitive MMO AI. Vastly improved AI means a new dynamic is

17810121317

Comments

  • Four0SixFour0Six Member UncommonPosts: 1,175
    Originally posted by Aceshighhhh

    Brian Green of Storybricks tweeted this today:

    "The holy trinity came about because of primitive MMO AI. Vastly improved AI means a new dynamic is needed. Wait before you despair." 

     

    Before everyone touts GW2 references or cries about the end of the world, consider that the system SOE is building for EQN requires the removal of the holy trinity. Guild Wars 2 didn't have near the AI fidelity that EQN will have. Let's wait until we can actually see the system in context before making huge assumptions.

    2 solutions to "New AI".

    1. Zerg/dodge, ala GW2

    2. More advanced trinity, including more sides, CC, Mez, whatnots.

    I like number 2, but.....Already the cry is against static "roles" since "I don't want to have to look for X class."

     

    So yeah, until I see hard evidence against, I assume zerg/dodge. It may be more involved than GW2. Maybe each class gets a dodge AND a block.

  • Four0SixFour0Six Member UncommonPosts: 1,175
    Originally posted by GeezerGamer
    Originally posted by Saerain

    There's this guy behind you who keeps stabbing you in the back with a dagger that really hurts. Meanwhile, another guy in the corner is shooting lightning bolts out of his finger tips and shocking the hell out of you. Another guy is hiding in the back healing everyone. But you are gonna focus on the one guy standing in front of you, hiding behind a shield and gently tapping you with his sword, the guy you can't seem to scratch and who isn't scratching you, because he keeps calling you names?

    Just doesn't make any sense.

    They need to take, and I suspect they are taking, a page from D&D (and not 4E). Healers did most of their healing out of combat, putting themselves at great risk if they tried to heal during combat. Wizards hid behind their more melee oriented friends, maybe using a sling or casting cantrips from time to time until the opportunity presented itself for them to really let loose with a powerful spell. Rogues either stood back and shot their bows at the enemies or hid in the shadows until the enemy passed, then jumped out to either one-shot it or, if it was engaged with a fighter, finish it off... and if they didn't finish it off, they usually got the hell out of there, afterward. Even fighter-types had to be cautious, usually using the terrain to their advantage to keep from being overwhelmed.

    All of this because any DM worth his weight in salt would not permit anyone to "tank" a mob. Even a cornered badger has the good sense to attack the weakest wolf in an effort to escape. You'd think a group of orcs would probably be smart enough to kill the guy who kept healing everyone else first as well, right?

    But back to EQN:

    I think what people concerned about losing the trinity don't realize is that if you advance the mob AI so that it can react more intelligently, it instantly invalidates the holy trinity. Any reasonably conscious thing will go after the caster or the healer, no matter what the tank does. The tank is pointless to attack in PvP and so he should be in PvE. The tank will then go roll something else because he's useless. In the end, the only class that will be left is the one that can survive the best. The others will mostly go unplayed and the game will pretty much suck.

    This is why the holy trinity has lasted so long, I think. It's the system that—so long as mobs are morons—manages to maintain a balance across the classes.

    If you're going to abolish the holy trinity, you need to boost mob AI, and vice versa. But you will also have to design classes that are equally compelling because each is better than the others at some essential activity. Maybe one class is the best at melee damage.  Another the best at ranged damage. Another the best at conditions, another at buffs and still another at control.  Each class should probably have a different weakness, too. With this kind of design, all the classes are essential for taking down a "boss".

    As for whether this paradigm is fun, though, of course, we won't really know until someone tries it. All that GW2 managed to show is that removing the trinity without buffing the AI and truly diversifying the classes just isn't that much fun. But it doesn't mean that removing the holy trinity can't work—it only shows that their approach to doing so doesn't.

    This is evolution, guys. It's innovation. If you want to advance, you have to experiment. Edison learned 100 ways not to make a light bulb before he finally got it right.

    I think too many people are putting way too much into this whole topic. !st of all, The AI as they call it is probably not all that revolutionary. Many of what it sounds like they are doing has been done before. 

    Anarchy Online was an example of a game (see highlighted in red) where healers had to be careful. Over healing would pull agro. It was actually a fun twist. Having to keep heals within a certain range. Enough to keep everyone alive but not so much as to ruin the tank's ability to manage the fight.

    I see this "AI" doing something like that. Where everyone will be able to do things that pull agro. The key will be to NOT do them if you cannot handle agro. So combat becomes a balance of what CAN I do next?  vs. what SHOULD I do next?  Of course systems like that also have issues. Like The entire group's DPS cannot exceed the tank's ability to manage it. Which in theory sounds good, but in practice, it just makes the entire encounter hinge on that tank which means anyone wishing to be a tank will have to be the highest developed character in the group. (This isn't necessarily going to be EQN's problem, It's just something that has been one in the past)

     

    Anyway, It should be very interesting to see what SoE is going to do to keep large open world encounters with dozens of informal, uncoordinated groups from deteriorating into massive "Evrey Man For himself" AOE fests where the boss mob hides behind a massive wall of summoned ads.

    I just need to add to the highlighted bit, that "No Orcs are NOT that smart, and would be a prime example of being able to be taunted."

    *wink wink*

  • aionixaionix Member UncommonPosts: 288

    The main issue I have with action combat MMO's is the lack of build diversity.  For example, in GW2 to run dungeons there was ONE, and I mean ONE, viable build per class (sometimes none, poor necros) that was acceptable for dungeon runners.  You know why?  Speed running.  People wanted to grind to build legendaries or get sets or make money.  So to do these repetitive dungeons again and again optimal builds were developed.  GW2 still to this day has whole skill lines that are USELESS in both PvE and PvP.  There was no diversity in how you wanted your character to play, a huge staple for RPG's in general. 

     

    I am not assuming this is going to happen to EQN.  Maybe they can avoid it with their dynamic AI and procedurally generated dungeons.  However, I will remain cautious when it comes to the combat of this game.  Trinity systems seem archaic because they build artificial rule sets that don't make sense in reality.  But these rule sets (if they are deep and complex) allow multiple strategies and builds in order to defeat them.  I love that.  I love being able to change my character playstyle when things start getting stale.  This is just a game right?

     

    I want EQN to succeed.  But I do want the developers to understand that they still need to build an RPG, where character diversity in both looks and playstyle exists.

  • keenberkeenber Member UncommonPosts: 438
    Originally posted by GeezerGamer
    Originally posted by Saerain

    There's this guy behind you who keeps stabbing you in the back with a dagger that really hurts. Meanwhile, another guy in the corner is shooting lightning bolts out of his finger tips and shocking the hell out of you. Another guy is hiding in the back healing everyone. But you are gonna focus on the one guy standing in front of you, hiding behind a shield and gently tapping you with his sword, the guy you can't seem to scratch and who isn't scratching you, because he keeps calling you names?

    Just doesn't make any sense.

    They need to take, and I suspect they are taking, a page from D&D (and not 4E). Healers did most of their healing out of combat, putting themselves at great risk if they tried to heal during combat. Wizards hid behind their more melee oriented friends, maybe using a sling or casting cantrips from time to time until the opportunity presented itself for them to really let loose with a powerful spell. Rogues either stood back and shot their bows at the enemies or hid in the shadows until the enemy passed, then jumped out to either one-shot it or, if it was engaged with a fighter, finish it off... and if they didn't finish it off, they usually got the hell out of there, afterward. Even fighter-types had to be cautious, usually using the terrain to their advantage to keep from being overwhelmed.

    All of this because any DM worth his weight in salt would not permit anyone to "tank" a mob. Even a cornered badger has the good sense to attack the weakest wolf in an effort to escape. You'd think a group of orcs would probably be smart enough to kill the guy who kept healing everyone else first as well, right?

    But back to EQN:

    I think what people concerned about losing the trinity don't realize is that if you advance the mob AI so that it can react more intelligently, it instantly invalidates the holy trinity. Any reasonably conscious thing will go after the caster or the healer, no matter what the tank does. The tank is pointless to attack in PvP and so he should be in PvE. The tank will then go roll something else because he's useless. In the end, the only class that will be left is the one that can survive the best. The others will mostly go unplayed and the game will pretty much suck.

    This is why the holy trinity has lasted so long, I think. It's the system that—so long as mobs are morons—manages to maintain a balance across the classes.

    If you're going to abolish the holy trinity, you need to boost mob AI, and vice versa. But you will also have to design classes that are equally compelling because each is better than the others at some essential activity. Maybe one class is the best at melee damage.  Another the best at ranged damage. Another the best at conditions, another at buffs and still another at control.  Each class should probably have a different weakness, too. With this kind of design, all the classes are essential for taking down a "boss".

    As for whether this paradigm is fun, though, of course, we won't really know until someone tries it. All that GW2 managed to show is that removing the trinity without buffing the AI and truly diversifying the classes just isn't that much fun. But it doesn't mean that removing the holy trinity can't work—it only shows that their approach to doing so doesn't.

    This is evolution, guys. It's innovation. If you want to advance, you have to experiment. Edison learned 100 ways not to make a light bulb before he finally got it right.

    I think too many people are putting way too much into this whole topic. !st of all, The AI as they call it is probably not all that revolutionary. Many of what it sounds like they are doing has been done before. 

    Anarchy Online was an example of a game (see highlighted in red) where healers had to be careful. Over healing would pull agro. It was actually a fun twist. Having to keep heals within a certain range. Enough to keep everyone alive but not so much as to ruin the tank's ability to manage the fight.

    I see this "AI" doing something like that. Where everyone will be able to do things that pull agro. The key will be to NOT do them if you cannot handle agro. So combat becomes a balance of what CAN I do next?  vs. what SHOULD I do next?  Of course systems like that also have issues. Like The entire group's DPS cannot exceed the tank's ability to manage it. Which in theory sounds good, but in practice, it just makes the entire encounter hinge on that tank which means anyone wishing to be a tank will have to be the highest developed character in the group.

     I hope you are right but we are then talking about tanks being better dps than anything else or that the tank will have to go in by him self and engage the mob untill he has gotten agro so other players can dps the mob. If that is the case then why remove taunt from a tanks abilites? or has it been confirmed that taunt has been removed?

    Anyway, It should be very interesting to see what SoE is going to do to keep large open world encounters with dozens of informal, uncoordinated groups from deteriorating into massive "Evrey Man For himself" AOE fests where the boss mob hides behind a massive wall of summoned ads.

     

  • OfficialFlowOfficialFlow Member Posts: 111
    Originally posted by CalmOceans

    The thing that is primitive is action combat.

    It allows for no pulling, it has inferior CC, inferior tanking, inferior healing. The whole "action combat" is flawed from the get go. It also results in a lack of community and lack of interdependence.

    And unless you have a brilliant solution that doesn't result in a zergfest, please for love of God stick to Holy Trinity which has stood the test of time.

     

    So far, you've shown a combat video of a warrior zerging, more primitive gameplay and AI than I have ever seen in any MMO on the market.

     

    On the one hand you claim you don't want to see guilds or groups fall apart because they lose an essential element in the trinity. That is the point....the interdepence is what makes trinity combat so strong. The depence on groups, on tanks, on healers, on CC, on pullers is the point of the trinity systems. They create the challenging content, they create the dependency, they create the community.

    for the love of..... must resist....must...i must....

    WOAH watch out we have a trinity fanboy over here

    im so overwhelmed that i cant even think up anything witty to write back

    trinity works as valid optional teamwork tactic but making it so that the whole combat revolves around it....sigh

    DONT FORCE IT DOWN MY THROAT

    AI built for trinity is inferior "kill the tank ignore everything else" including this all they have is a large health pool.

  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer Member EpicPosts: 8,802
    Originally posted by keenber
    Originally posted by GeezerGamer
    Originally posted by Saerain

    <STUFF>

     You'd think a group of orcs would probably be smart enough to kill the guy who kept healing everyone else first as well, right?

    <MORE STUFF>

     I hope you are right but we are then talking about tanks being better dps than anything else or that the tank will have to go in by him self and engage the mob untill he has gotten agro so other players can dps the mob. If that is the case then why remove taunt from a tanks abilites? or has it been confirmed that taunt has been removed?

    Anyway, It should be very interesting to see what SoE is going to do to keep large open world encounters with dozens of informal, uncoordinated groups from deteriorating into massive "Evrey Man For himself" AOE fests where the boss mob hides behind a massive wall of summoned ads.

     

    Before I start, let me define what I mean by "Tank". It's the player currently responsible for managing the primary mob's attention.

     

    I think what I am trying to get at, is, I would love to see a system that encourages smart play where players have to know what they are doing. Where anyone not paying attention to what the tank is doing and proceeds to do something stupid can pull agro. So everyone MUST be paying attention. everyone MUST know what the tank is doing and has to adjust accordingly.

     

    This is where I am going to be honest. I just don't see that happening here. Not this game. The type of system I described above, sounds like it's in the opposite direction of where SoE wants to take EQN. I hope I am wrong.

  • OfficialFlowOfficialFlow Member Posts: 111
    Originally posted by CalmOceans
    Originally posted by botrytis
    Originally posted by Shadowguy64
    As long as it isn't zergy, then I'll be very pleased. That's all I ask. No zerg.

    Every game has that - get over it.
     

    EQ has no zerg whatsoever, none, and the reason is the trinity system and the dependency and controlled and strategic combat it creates.

    Lol strategic combat? where?

    casters and rangers out in the back tanks aggroing and pulling. now lets add a Decent AI to the mix and the first thing the boss does is that it goes and kills those that are easiest to kill WHERE IS YOUR AGGRO NOW BITCH you just lost all your healers and casters now is the tanks turn to die since no one is left to heal him. target priority you know. the whole concept of "agro" is flawed in the first place.

    Trinity = "DO THIS YOU DUMB MONKEY" and god forbid if you do something out of your role you better be prepared for a shit-storm

    strategy means that there are different tactics that can be used in battle if there is only one tactic that repeats endlessly there is no such thing as strategy

    especialy in WoW style combat what a snooze fest just stand still and "spam those keys you moron"

    no i am not saying that trinity is completely bad, as an OPTION that can be chosen from other tactics its all good but if thats the only option all i can ask is, Where the hell is your strategy now?

  • Whiskey_SamWhiskey_Sam Member UncommonPosts: 323
    Originally posted by OfficialFlow
    Originally posted by CalmOceans
    Originally posted by botrytis
    Originally posted by Shadowguy64
    As long as it isn't zergy, then I'll be very pleased. That's all I ask. No zerg.

    Every game has that - get over it.
     

    EQ has no zerg whatsoever, none, and the reason is the trinity system and the dependency and controlled and strategic combat it creates.

    Lol strategic combat? where?

    casters and rangers out in the back tanks aggroing and pulling. now lets add a Decent AI to the mix and the first thing the boss does is that it goes and kills those that are easiest to kill WHERE IS YOUR AGGRO NOW BITCH you just lost all your healers and casters now is the tanks turn to die since no one is left to heal him. target priority you know. the whole concept of "agro" is flawed in the first place.

    Trinity = "DO THIS YOU DUMB MONKEY" and god forbid if you do something out of your role you better be prepared for a shit-storm

    strategy means that there are different tactics that can be used in battle if there is only one tactic that repeats endlessly there is no such thing as strategy

    especialy in WoW style combat what a snooze fest just stand still and "spam those keys you moron"

    no i am not saying that trinity is completely bad, as an OPTION that can be chosen from other tactics its all good but if thats the only option all i can ask is, Where the hell is your strategy now?

    And the "decent" AI you describe gets beaten very simply by having the person with aggro running in a big circle while everyone else burns the boss down.  Real exciting, yeah?  There is nothing smart about AI where a mob chases one guy all over the place (whether it's a tank or whatever person their script says should be attacked) while getting killed.  Smart AI would try to take cover or find a defensible position.  Maybe get reinforcements if there are any.  Video game combat is contrived from the outset, and it's laughable to act like having the mob fight one guy over another is more realistic when it shouldn't be fighting that badly outnumbered in the first place. 

    ___________________________
    Have flask; will travel.

  • manio22manio22 Member UncommonPosts: 35
    Originally posted by CalmOceans

    The thing that is primitive is action combat.

    It allows for no pulling, it has inferior CC, inferior tanking, inferior healing. The whole "action combat" is flawed from the get go. It also results in a lack of community and lack of interdependence.

    And unless you have a brilliant solution that doesn't result in a zergfest, please for love of God stick to Holy Trinity which has stood the test of time.

     

    So far, you've shown a combat video of a warrior zerging, more primitive gameplay and AI than I have ever seen in any MMO on the market.

     

    On the one hand you claim you don't want to see guilds or groups fall apart because they lose an essential element in the trinity. That is the point....the interdepence is what makes trinity combat so strong. The depence on groups, on tanks, on healers, on CC, on pullers is the point of the trinity systems. They create the challenging content, they create the dependency, they create the community.

     

    Action MMO have never managed to surpass Street Fighter on crack gameplay. So much for that "advanced AI"

    Agree with CalmOceans in this quote and every reply he made. When i was in WoW and Rift i thought action combat and the removal of trinity to be the future of mmo, until i tried Neverwinter and Dragon's Prophet. To summarize my experience in combat for both games  : Dull , no skill zergfest. So yea, i agree with CalmOceans on this.

    I may not agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it
    --Voltaire

  • r0guyr0guy Member Posts: 115
    Originally posted by Whiskey_Sam Video game combat is contrived from the outset, and it's laughable to act like having the mob fight one guy over another is more realistic when it shouldn't be fighting that badly outnumbered in the first place. 

    The whole point of strategy is to strike the enemy using advantages like outnumbering them.

    The point you're making has been shot down a hundred times by now and this is getting old. "The mob will always attack someone so there's no difference!" Really? So the strategies the romans used is no different than that of a modern army today then? Logical fallacy alert!

  • NagelRitterNagelRitter Member Posts: 607

    I will repeat again.

    Battle complexity has nothing to do with action combat. It has to do with the implementation of action combat. Action games can still have CC and everything else, even the aforementioned Dota-likes have plenty of CC.

    Action combat has nothing to do with zerging. Many trinity games can be zerged just as much if they let that amount of people in.

    Zerging indicates one of two things:

    - the encounter is too easy;

    - you suck at the game and are going to die. The reason most of you suck at such games is because you played with the Trinity too long, and the Trinity gives you rigid roles that never change. The real world doesn't work like that.

    PvP is the representation of Trinity-less combat and PvP is not zergy unless, again, you suck.

    Favorite MMO: Vanilla WoW
    Currently playing: GW2, EVE
    Excited for: Wildstar, maybe?

  • TinybinaTinybina Member Posts: 2,130
    Originally posted by Aceshighhhh

    Brian Green of Storybricks tweeted this today:

    "The holy trinity came about because of primitive MMO AI. Vastly improved AI means a new dynamic is needed. Wait before you despair." 

     

    Before everyone touts GW2 references or cries about the end of the world, consider that the system SOE is building for EQN requires the removal of the holy trinity. Guild Wars 2 didn't have near the AI fidelity that EQN will have. Let's wait until we can actually see the system in context before making huge assumptions.

     

     

    Yeah because the AI we saw in those little video clips sure did look REVOLUTIONARY.  I mean the way that warrior keep smacking them down and the way they keep coming right back..  It was like they were making adjustments to his "smack" tactics, I saw one of them like pause for a second before he ran up on the warrior and get 'smacked" agian..   WOW!....

     

    Or how about when that mage cast that ice wall down.  The way that REVOLUTIONARY intelligent AI whacked at the ice wall, you could tell they were concentrating their efforts in one spot to soften up that WALL!  Amazing!....

     

    /sarcasm off

     

    They showed nothing in that video that would lead a normal person, on the outside looking in, to believe that  EQN AI is anything different then what we have seen in the past.  But for the fanbois that believe everything Smedly and his crew tell them, then they saw that video through a whole different set of eyes...

    ------------------------------
    You see, every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with their surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You spread to an area, and you multiply, and you multiply, until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet.-Mr.Smith

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Member RarePosts: 14,247
    Originally posted by manio22
    Originally posted by CalmOceans

    The thing that is primitive is action combat.

    It allows for no pulling, it has inferior CC, inferior tanking, inferior healing. The whole "action combat" is flawed from the get go. It also results in a lack of community and lack of interdependence.

    And unless you have a brilliant solution that doesn't result in a zergfest, please for love of God stick to Holy Trinity which has stood the test of time.

     

    So far, you've shown a combat video of a warrior zerging, more primitive gameplay and AI than I have ever seen in any MMO on the market.

     

    On the one hand you claim you don't want to see guilds or groups fall apart because they lose an essential element in the trinity. That is the point....the interdepence is what makes trinity combat so strong. The depence on groups, on tanks, on healers, on CC, on pullers is the point of the trinity systems. They create the challenging content, they create the dependency, they create the community.

     

    Action MMO have never managed to surpass Street Fighter on crack gameplay. So much for that "advanced AI"

    Agree with CalmOceans in this quote and every reply he made. When i was in WoW and Rift i thought action combat and the removal of trinity to be the future of mmo, until i tried Neverwinter and Dragon's Prophet. To summarize my experience in combat for both games  : Dull , no skill zergfest. So yea, i agree with CalmOceans on this.

    If we're only talking about mobs designed for combat against a taunt-based system, then you two would be correct. However, it would be absurd to have EQ/WOW style mobs in a non-trinity environment.

    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

  • Whiskey_SamWhiskey_Sam Member UncommonPosts: 323
    Originally posted by r0guy
    Originally posted by Whiskey_Sam Video game combat is contrived from the outset, and it's laughable to act like having the mob fight one guy over another is more realistic when it shouldn't be fighting that badly outnumbered in the first place. 

    The whole point of strategy is to strike the enemy using advantages like outnumbering them.

    The point you're making has been shot down a hundred times by now and this is getting old. "The mob will always attack someone so there's no difference!" Really? So the strategies the romans used is no different than that of a modern army today then? Logical fallacy alert!

    And no smart enemy is going to stand there and try to fight when he is greatly outnumbered making boss fights contrived from the outset.  What the hell does Roman strategy have to do with one mob fighting 5, 6, 7, or more people at once?  If you want to "shoot down" my point, then address my point and not some non sequitur you pulled out of your ass.

    ___________________________
    Have flask; will travel.

  • Gaia_HunterGaia_Hunter Member UncommonPosts: 3,065

    People say GW2 is chaotic and the AI isn't good because they didn't play enough to understand who the AI will target.

    But there are patterns - you have a shield, it is quite likely they will bash you, especially if you are at zero range.

    The giant champion that attacks the town of nageling will go after anyone trying to ressurect.

    One of the toymaker end bosses would ignore the melee dudes and go for the ranged ones.

    And once again, if you want to see how trinity work without taunting and aggro modifiers look at Guild Wars 1, where tanking consisted of body blocking the enemy so he couldn't reach the healers.

    Currently playing: GW2
    Going cardboard starter kit: Ticket to ride, Pandemic, Carcassonne, Dominion, 7 Wonders

  • r0guyr0guy Member Posts: 115
    Originally posted by Whiskey_Sam
    Originally posted by r0guy
    Originally posted by Whiskey_Sam Video game combat is contrived from the outset, and it's laughable to act like having the mob fight one guy over another is more realistic when it shouldn't be fighting that badly outnumbered in the first place. 

    The whole point of strategy is to strike the enemy using advantages like outnumbering them.

    The point you're making has been shot down a hundred times by now and this is getting old. "The mob will always attack someone so there's no difference!" Really? So the strategies the romans used is no different than that of a modern army today then? Logical fallacy alert!

    And no smart enemy is going to stand there and try to fight when he is greatly outnumbered making boss fights contrived from the outset. So, irl, no-one ever fights when they are outnumbered? We can't have a discussion here if you don't know what the word strategy means.  What the hell does Roman strategy have to do with one mob fighting 5, 6, 7, or more people at once?  If you want to "shoot down" my point, then address my point and not some non sequitur you pulled out of your ass. Just because you have reading comprehension issues doesn't make an argument into a non-sequitur.

    "There is nothing smart about AI where a mob chases one guy all over the place (whether it's a tank or whatever person their script says should be attacked) while getting killed."  So are you saying that going for a tank that does no damage while being healed by 10 others guys is just as smart as possibly going for weaker or more threatening targets? Or that every single mob always going for the tank is incredibly predictable (wich is the opposite of requiring strategy?) Because it really isn't. You've create multiple dumb strawmen and you're constantly avoiding comparisons to PVP and games like MOBAs where people don't "run around in a circle" and cutting off people from the rest of their team in order to outnumber them is a viable strategy.

     

  • EeksEeks Member Posts: 72

    Yeah because the AI we saw in those little video clips sure did look REVOLUTIONARY.  I mean the way that warrior keep smacking them down and the way they keep coming right back..  It was like they were making adjustments to his "smack" tactics, I saw one of them like pause for a second before he ran up on the warrior and get 'smacked" agian..   WOW!....

     

    Or how about when that mage cast that ice wall down.  The way that REVOLUTIONARY intelligent AI whacked at the ice wall, you could tell they were concentrating their efforts in one spot to soften up that WALL!  Amazing!....

     

    /sarcasm off

     

    Again they showed nothing in that video that would lead a normal person on the outside looking, to believe that  EQN AI is anything different then what we have seen in the past.  But for the fanbois that believe everything Smedly and his crew tell them, then they saw that video through a whole different set of eyes...

    I think it was Darrin who commented that those videos were tech demos, not combat demos.  The enemies weren't pathing and not all of them were even attacking back.  They haven't shown any "real" combat footage yet.

  • GravebladeGraveblade Member UncommonPosts: 494

    Yes older systems where you have to create community to work together and play your specific role to the best of its ability in a "ROLE" playing game sucks. I want everyone on the same playing field and to have no real specific reason or role so that I do not really need to be there.

     

    I mean after all in a game, lets say baseball, where is the fun in having a specific role like being a batsman or a fielder.

     

    Lets just make it so everyone can bat and catch and then make the ball whiz around and smack whoever it likes in the face.

     

    /sarcasm

     

     

     

    You can say "I will bat" or "I will catch" but in the end it means nothing. You have no real grander purpose in a game system like eqn, everyone does the same thing. Hurt stuff.

     

    Don't get me wrong, I enjoy hurting stuff alot. But there needs to be more in an mmorpg that you could potentially be playing for years. More individuality please WITHIN a specific role. Roles also help to create community and you will be rewarded for your ability to play a specific role well.

    Started playing mmorpg's in 1996 and have been hooked ever since. It began with The Kingdom of Drakkar, Ultima Online, Everquest, DAoC, WoW...
  • AIMonsterAIMonster Member UncommonPosts: 2,059

    People obviously played a different Everquest than I did.  All raid bosses up till about mid Planes of Power essentially boiled down to the "pull" and once the boss was positioned correctly it was pretty much a gear check from that point assuming your clerics could handle a basic complete heal rotation.  Most classes boiled down to two or three button rotations on raids and some were even worse like melee classes that essentially just autoattacked (or autoattacked and spammed taunt if tanking) the entire time.  It's not like tanking and healing was difficult.  Tanking boiled down to standing in one spot (usually a wall) and spamming taunt and attacking with +hate weapons.  Healing was on a CH rotation for clerics, so as long as you can count you were good to go.

    There were no real limitations on the number of people you could bring on a raid and guilds had no issue recruiting people as long as they could keep up with the hardcore time investment necessary to keep your gear at raiding level.  The first dragon raids, Nagafen and Vox were generally pretty chaotic and absolutely boiled down to how well you could "zerg" the dragon.  Classes were completely useless in raids compared to other classes (Rangers / Enchanters beyond casting their buffs and Tash which one Enchanter could easily do), but were brought along anyway because there was no real downside to bringing along more people in a raid.  Worse yet, you could resurrect in combat and the Cleric epic made this mana free so you can have a Cleric sit back and resurrect people (something we did often) if they died.  No enrage or soft enrage timers till Planes of Power either so there was no pressure to "bring the DEEPS" either.

    Groups weren't any better.  You pretty much did the same thing you did on raids, with Enchanters and Bards now being critical to the group makeup (making up the CC in the Holy Trinity).  Sure, there was some added difficulty with having the CC and not breaking it (unless of course you were in an AoE group where you just spammed away), but it really didn't require any critical thought and it certainly wasn't more difficult - no it was EASIER than current generation MMOs.  The only difficulty on the game came with the time investment, learning your way around the world or memorizing /loc locations, and the extremely harsh death penalty, and mandatory group participation everywhere (unless you happen to play one of the few classes great at soloing).

  • tordurbartordurbar Member UncommonPosts: 420
    Originally posted by CalmOceans

    The thing that is primitive is action combat.

    It allows for no pulling, it has inferior CC, inferior tanking, inferior healing. The whole "action combat" is flawed from the get go. It also results in a lack of community and lack of interdependence.

    And unless you have a brilliant solution that doesn't result in a zergfest, please for love of God stick to Holy Trinity which has stood the test of time.

     

    So far, you've shown a combat video of a warrior zerging, more primitive gameplay and AI than I have ever seen in any MMO on the market.

     

    On the one hand you claim you don't want to see guilds or groups fall apart because they lose an essential element in the trinity. That is the point....the interdepence is what makes trinity combat so strong. The depence on groups, on tanks, on healers, on CC, on pullers is the point of the trinity systems. They create the challenging content, they create the dependency, they create the community.

     

    Action MMO have never managed to surpass Street Fighter on crack gameplay. So much for that "advanced AI"

    /this 

    What amuses me is that the Trinity is seen as developed by the developers. Nothing can be further from the truth. The Trinity was developed by role players back in paper rpgs. I remember back in the 80's having a great time in a D&D dungeon playing the healer part of the Trinity. 

  • jtcgsjtcgs Member Posts: 1,777
    Originally posted by Aceshighhhh

    Brian Green of Storybricks tweeted this today:

    "The holy trinity came about because of primitive MMO AI. Vastly improved AI means a new dynamic is needed. Wait before you despair." 

     

    Before everyone touts GW2 references or cries about the end of the world, consider that the system SOE is building for EQN requires the removal of the holy trinity. Guild Wars 2 didn't have near the AI fidelity that EQN will have. Let's wait until we can actually see the system in context before making huge assumptions.

     Its true.

    The Trinity is as antiquated as subscription fees.

    “I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson

  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 8,077
    Originally posted by tordurbar

    /this 

    What amuses me is that the Trinity is seen as developed by the developers. Nothing can be further from the truth. The Trinity was developed by role players back in paper rpgs. I remember back in the 80's having a great time in a D&D dungeon playing the healer part of the Trinity. 

    Sorry but I disagree. I started PnP MMOs back when I was 13 years old (I'm 44 now, do the maths), and while you had "specialized" characters like healers, you never had a true "tank" with the stupid taunting mechanic in PnP, unless maybe the DM was a total retard.

    The "trinity" we see in many MMOs isn't a norm at all, and definitely doesn't come from PnP RPGs, it's just a cheap solution to poor AI.

    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn in Star Wars.
    After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that nor does the ability to write.
    CPU: Core I7 9700k (4.90ghz) - GPU: Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti G1 Gaming - RAM: 16GB Kingston HyperX Savage DDR4 3000 - Motherboard: Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra - PSU: Antec TruePower New 750W - Storage: Kingston KC1000 NVMe 960gb SSD and 2x1TB WD Velociraptor HDDs (Raid 0) - Main display: Philips 40PUK6809 4K 3D TV - Second display: Philips 273v 27" gaming monitor - VR: Pimax 8K headset and Razer Hydra controllers - Soundcard: Sony STR-DH550 AV Receiver HDMI linked with the GPU and the TV, with Jamo S 426 HS 3 5.0 speakers and Pioneer S-21W subwoofer - OS: Windows 10 Pro 64 bits.

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Member RarePosts: 14,247
    Originally posted by tordurbar

    /this 

    What amuses me is that the Trinity is seen as developed by the developers. Nothing can be further from the truth. The Trinity was developed by role players back in paper rpgs. I remember back in the 80's having a great time in a D&D dungeon playing the healer part of the Trinity. 

    Yes, you played the healer role. You did not, however, have a fighter that went "NEENER NEENER NEENER" at spiders, which is the defining aspect of the Trinity. The trinity isn't just three roles, it's three specific roles.

    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

  • KiyorisKiyoris Member RarePosts: 2,130
    Originally posted by OfficialFlow

    Lol strategic combat? where?

    casters and rangers out in the back tanks aggroing and pulling. now lets add a Decent AI to the mix and the first thing the boss does is that it goes and kills those that are easiest to kill WHERE IS YOUR AGGRO NOW BITCH you just lost all your healers and casters now is the tanks turn to die since no one is left to heal him. target priority you know. the whole concept of "agro" is flawed in the first place.

    They tried it in EQ and it failed, if you spent less time cursing and more time playing the franchise you would know.

    It was tried twice, and it failed twice. Look up what Mastery of Corruption Trial is. They're mobs that go for your healers and casters.

    And the systems failed, because it created chaos and the raids themselves were terrible because of it.

    Removing the trinity aggro system actually removed the strategy elements from the raid, because it resulted in chaos. It became a DPS faceroll.

  • jtcgsjtcgs Member Posts: 1,777
    Originally posted by tordurbar
    Originally posted by CalmOceans

    The thing that is primitive is action combat.

    It allows for no pulling, it has inferior CC, inferior tanking, inferior healing. The whole "action combat" is flawed from the get go. It also results in a lack of community and lack of interdependence.

    And unless you have a brilliant solution that doesn't result in a zergfest, please for love of God stick to Holy Trinity which has stood the test of time.

     

    So far, you've shown a combat video of a warrior zerging, more primitive gameplay and AI than I have ever seen in any MMO on the market.

     

    On the one hand you claim you don't want to see guilds or groups fall apart because they lose an essential element in the trinity. That is the point....the interdepence is what makes trinity combat so strong. The depence on groups, on tanks, on healers, on CC, on pullers is the point of the trinity systems. They create the challenging content, they create the dependency, they create the community.

     

    Action MMO have never managed to surpass Street Fighter on crack gameplay. So much for that "advanced AI"

    /this 

    What amuses me is that the Trinity is seen as developed by the developers. Nothing can be further from the truth. The Trinity was developed by role players back in paper rpgs. I remember back in the 80's having a great time in a D&D dungeon playing the healer part of the Trinity. 

     Flat out bull.

    There was nothing about any of the D&D or AD&D 1st edition sets that required the trinity. Just because the 3 types were present in the rule books, it doesn't mean it was a requirement of the game itself. I can recall so many sessions where we all played Theives and Fighters...others where everyone played Druids to fit the campaign.

    A good DM did not have the limits that would be placed with forced trinity play...just like an MMO wont have the limited design that comes with forced trinity.

    “I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson

Sign In or Register to comment.