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

1235717

Comments

  • PAL-18PAL-18 Member UncommonPosts: 844
    Originally posted by Apraxis

    Ok.. in this thread everything is rather blurred, full with wrong information, and misleading.

    Noone talks about that there are not different roles in combat and you have not any tactical dependency on each other, because it will be absolutely possible to have different roles and dependency on each other in EQN.(Quote below)

    They just cut out the aggro/taunt mechanism.. and this mechanism simplified almost everything. Because the Tank got this magic ability to get attacked from all mobs. And because that simple mechnism, the Healer could entirely focus on healing the Main Tank and everyone else could do Dmg without worrying about anything else. And that is refered as the holy trinity. It is not about the lack of roles, it is about the lack of the old aggro/taunt mechanism.

    And they think to get rid off that "taunt/aggro" mechanism because they want utilize their new AI.

     


    Originally from Jeff Butler @EQN Class Panel from http://everquestnext.wikia.com/wiki/Classes

     

    I think one thing that you’ll see from us and we’ll demonstrate this as we get deeper into combat, is that we have a very detailed and intricate plan for moving around and fighting. The NPCs are capable of executing strategy and tactics and you’ll require your own intricate tactics to overcome them. We are saying that no one specific role or pair of roles is required in unlocking the strategy to defeating an encounter. 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…
     


     
    So the comparsion to GW2 is far off. In GW2 you do not only have no taunt/aggro mechanism, you also do not have any healer(miniheals and self heal is no real healing). And you also do not have anyone with serious Crowd Controll.

     

    If you really want to compare EQN combat(albeit we don't know any specifics) you should better compare it with GW1. (8 Skills, Real Healer, Real CC, no taunt/aggro)

    But please stop simplifying things or talk about things noone ever said, nor anything in the slightest is "fact" about it.

     

    But arent you forgetting something in here,Heals and dps does taunting also.

    Or for example charming in some games and when mob gets released he will attack you for the rest of his life etc.

     

    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/ **

  • r0guyr0guy Member Posts: 115
    Originally posted by wsmar
    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.

     

    I'd really like to know what will differentiate EQN from the "primitive" AI we've seen in the past.

     

    There is nothing more dynamic than PvP, and the trinity works wonders. I have a hard time understanding why they believe the trinity system is "primitive" because it was used in old games. That's like saying Quantum Mechanics is "primitive" because we discovered it back in the 20s, yet we are constantly finding new ways to use it.

     

    Can anyone honestly give a good counter response to that? I'd love to hear it. I'm not trying to sound cocky or arrogant, I'm actually very intrigued.

     

    I'll bite.

    What they've said so far about the AI is pretty darn different to what we've seen. The orcs not spawning in camps, but making choices about where they go depending on likes/dislikes is radical. But it's just words for now so I'll skip that point.

    In the MMOs I've played like WOW/SWTOR/WAR/EVE the PVP never relied on the trinity to work. So I'd love to know what you meant by that. Rogue/MAGE/Priest was almost always the best setup for 3V3 WoW arenas and i don't see a tank in it, for example.

    You guys seriously need to stop with the misquotes here, the devs never said it was primitive because it was old. There are lots of "old" things that'll still be in the the game.

  • wsmarwsmar Member Posts: 122
    Originally posted by Apraxis

    Ok.. in this thread everything is rather blurred, full with wrong information, and misleading.

    Noone talks about that there are not different roles in combat and you have not any tactical dependency on each other, because it will be absolutely possible to have different roles and dependency on each other in EQN.(Quote below)

    They just cut out the aggro/taunt mechanism.. and this mechanism simplified almost everything. Because the Tank got this magic ability to get attacked from all mobs. And because that simple mechnism, the Healer could entirely focus on healing the Main Tank and everyone else could do Dmg without worrying about anything else. And that is refered as the holy trinity. It is not about the lack of roles, it is about the lack of the old aggro/taunt mechanism.

    And they think to get rid off that "taunt/aggro" mechanism because they want utilize their new AI.

     


    Originally from Jeff Butler @EQN Class Panel from http://everquestnext.wikia.com/wiki/Classes

     

    I think one thing that you’ll see from us and we’ll demonstrate this as we get deeper into combat, is that we have a very detailed and intricate plan for moving around and fighting. The NPCs are capable of executing strategy and tactics and you’ll require your own intricate tactics to overcome them. We are saying that no one specific role or pair of roles is required in unlocking the strategy to defeating an encounter. 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…
     


     
    So the comparsion to GW2 is far off. In GW2 you do not only have no taunt/aggro mechanism, you also do not have any healer(miniheals and self heal is no real healing). And you also do not have anyone with serious Crowd Controll.

     

    If you really want to compare EQN combat(albeit we don't know any specifics) you should better compare it with GW1. (8 Skills, Real Healer, Real CC, no taunt/aggro)

    But please stop simplifying things or talk about things noone ever said, nor anything in the slightest is "fact" about it.

     

     

     

    That quote proves nothing really. In fact it sounds more like GW2 than what you seem to think it does. The quote you took was worded very very carefully. They don't say that there are healers, or tanks, or dps, and something interesting to note is that they say there isn't one solution to winning a battle. Wow does that sound a lot like GW2. GW2 also claimed to have roles and also claimed to not have 1 solution to every problem (which was true because the holy trinity wasn't present).

     

    It's funny really. SOE live was so hyped up, and yet we barely learned anything about the game. We are about as informationless as we were before.

  • ApraxisApraxis Member UncommonPosts: 1,509
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by Apraxis

    Ok.. in this thread everything is rather blurred, full with wrong information, and misleading.

    Noone talks about that there are not different roles in combat and you have not any tactical dependency on each other, because it will be absolutely possible to have different roles and dependency on each other in EQN.(Quote below)

    They just cut out the aggro/taunt mechanism.. and this mechanism simplified almost everything. Because the Tank got this magic ability to get attacked from all mobs. And because that simple mechnism, the Healer could entirely focus on healing the Main Tank and everyone else could do Dmg without worrying about anything else. And that is refered as the holy trinity. It is not about the lack of roles, it is about the lack of the old aggro/taunt mechanism.

    And they think to get rid off that "taunt/aggro" mechanism because they want utilize their new AI.

     


    Originally from Jeff Butler @EQN Class Panel from http://everquestnext.wikia.com/wiki/Classes

     

    I think one thing that you’ll see from us and we’ll demonstrate this as we get deeper into combat, is that we have a very detailed and intricate plan for moving around and fighting. The NPCs are capable of executing strategy and tactics and you’ll require your own intricate tactics to overcome them. We are saying that no one specific role or pair of roles is required in unlocking the strategy to defeating an encounter. 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…
     


     
    So the comparsion to GW2 is far off. In GW2 you do not only have no taunt/aggro mechanism, you also do not have any healer(miniheals and self heal is no real healing). And you also do not have anyone with serious Crowd Controll.

     

    If you really want to compare EQN combat(albeit we don't know any specifics) you should better compare it with GW1. (8 Skills, Real Healer, Real CC, no taunt/aggro)

    But please stop simplifying things or talk about things noone ever said, nor anything in the slightest is "fact" about it.

     

    But arent you forgetting something in here,Heals and dps does taunting also.

    Or for example charming in some games and when mob gets released he will attack you for the rest of his life etc.

     

    No.. they create aggro. But not so much as the taunt abiltity from the tank. Because of that the holy trinty works. If it wouldn't you will have EQN. Because in EQN every Mob will have some Aggro Tables(who is the most dangerous, who is the most easiest to kill, where is nearest, or whatever).. and that is all the difference. You will have healers, you will have Crowd Control, and all roles we are familar with.. and maybe more.. 40 classes are a lot of possibilities for different roles.

  • RydesonRydeson Member UncommonPosts: 3,852

    So.. I'm playing a cloth wearing squishy solo..  How do I keep mob(s) from killing me.. I can either:

    1. Let me pet tank it.. (WAIT) taunting has been removed, so how does Pet hold agro?   And if pet can hold ago in this scenario then I'll just have pets tank in group situations too.. Do we even know if pets are even in the game?
    2. I use CC and kill mob range, or severely weaken it before it gets to me.. Again, if I can do that, who gives a shit how smart the mob is, he's dead by the time he gets to me..
    3. I can take him mono v mono.. hence I'm my own tank.. and if that is the case, then everyone is equal and why bother having classes?  other then different combat effects..
  • wsmarwsmar Member Posts: 122
    Originally posted by r0guy
    Originally posted by wsmar
    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.

     

    I'd really like to know what will differentiate EQN from the "primitive" AI we've seen in the past.

     

    There is nothing more dynamic than PvP, and the trinity works wonders. I have a hard time understanding why they believe the trinity system is "primitive" because it was used in old games. That's like saying Quantum Mechanics is "primitive" because we discovered it back in the 20s, yet we are constantly finding new ways to use it.

     

    Can anyone honestly give a good counter response to that? I'd love to hear it. I'm not trying to sound cocky or arrogant, I'm actually very intrigued.

     

    I'll bite.

    What they've said so far about the AI is pretty darn different to what we've seen. The orcs not spawning in camps, but making choices about where they go depending on likes/dislikes is radical. But it's just words for now so I'll skip that point.

    In the MMOs I've played like WOW/SWTOR/WAR/EVE the PVP never relied on the trinity to work. So I'd love to know what you meant by that. Rogue/MAGE/Priest was almost always the best setup for 3V3 WoW arenas and i don't see a tank in it, for example.

    You guys seriously need to stop with the misquotes here, the devs never said it was primitive because it was old. There are lots of "old" things that'll still be in the the game.

    You honestly believe that these Orcs are actually going to have likes and dislikes? Apparently SOE has surpassed the AI the leading scientists in the world use when they try to create "smart" robots. It's programmed that way. Just like GW2's "dynamic" events were programmed to look "dynamic". The fact that the even use the word Artificial Intelligence continuely bothers me.

     

    You don't think WAR's PvP was dependent on the holy trinity? Are you serious? If that was truly the case, WAR would have been the ranged cluster fuck that GW2 was. That's silly. I'm talking about open world pvp, not instanced battlegrounds and scenarios. Even then, having a good healer, a good tank, and a good dps in PvP battlegrounds and scenarios made the world of difference.

  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer Member EpicPosts: 8,807
    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.

    So wait? Is this about threat mechanics or tanking? because I can see improved AI removing the need for threat mechanics, But I still like the idea of having tanks in the game.

  • ApraxisApraxis Member UncommonPosts: 1,509
    Originally posted by wsmar
    Originally posted by Apraxis

    Ok.. in this thread everything is rather blurred, full with wrong information, and misleading.

    Noone talks about that there are not different roles in combat and you have not any tactical dependency on each other, because it will be absolutely possible to have different roles and dependency on each other in EQN.(Quote below)

    They just cut out the aggro/taunt mechanism.. and this mechanism simplified almost everything. Because the Tank got this magic ability to get attacked from all mobs. And because that simple mechnism, the Healer could entirely focus on healing the Main Tank and everyone else could do Dmg without worrying about anything else. And that is refered as the holy trinity. It is not about the lack of roles, it is about the lack of the old aggro/taunt mechanism.

    And they think to get rid off that "taunt/aggro" mechanism because they want utilize their new AI.

     


    Originally from Jeff Butler @EQN Class Panel from http://everquestnext.wikia.com/wiki/Classes

     

    I think one thing that you’ll see from us and we’ll demonstrate this as we get deeper into combat, is that we have a very detailed and intricate plan for moving around and fighting. The NPCs are capable of executing strategy and tactics and you’ll require your own intricate tactics to overcome them. We are saying that no one specific role or pair of roles is required in unlocking the strategy to defeating an encounter. 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…
     


     
    So the comparsion to GW2 is far off. In GW2 you do not only have no taunt/aggro mechanism, you also do not have any healer(miniheals and self heal is no real healing). And you also do not have anyone with serious Crowd Controll.

     

    If you really want to compare EQN combat(albeit we don't know any specifics) you should better compare it with GW1. (8 Skills, Real Healer, Real CC, no taunt/aggro)

    But please stop simplifying things or talk about things noone ever said, nor anything in the slightest is "fact" about it.

     

     

     

    That quote proves nothing really. In fact it sounds more like GW2 than what you seem to think it does. The quote you took was worded very very carefully. They don't say that there are healers, or tanks, or dps, and something interesting to note is that they say there isn't one solution to winning a battle. Wow does that sound a lot like GW2. GW2 also claimed to have roles and also claimed to not have 1 solution to every problem (which was true because the holy trinity wasn't present).

     

    It's funny really. SOE live was so hyped up, and yet we barely learned anything about the game. We are about as informationless as we were before.

    Again not really true. Anet said before GW2 release that they want to get rid off the Healer. They explicitly said it.. and they have done it.. and we all see what happend then. And they also get off any real Crowd Controll Class..

    Let's assume you would have a real Healer in GW2, even without any tank. Do you think every group combat would be completely different? I would say YES. It would be a complete different game. The same would be true with a real Crowd Controll Class.

  • ApraxisApraxis Member UncommonPosts: 1,509
    Originally posted by GeezerGamer
    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.

    So wait? Is this about threat mechanics or tanking? because I can see improved AI removing the need for threat mechanics, But I still like the idea of having tanks in the game.

    The tank as we know it is gone.(because of the threat mechanics) But they said (class panel Q&A), the tank will have defensive abilitiy. But however that may work, or how it will look like is in the dark up to now.

    We can assume that it may be similar to games, where you could tank without "taunt", like GW1 or DAoC(guard, intercept), or WAR.

  • SephirosoSephiroso Member RarePosts: 2,019
    Originally posted by Abrraham
    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"

     

    Play Tera in endgame (hardmodes). It's the only Action MMO which has a tactical approach and advanced AI:

    you must be joking. Tera's AI is even more predictable than WoW's.

    image
    Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!

  • wsmarwsmar Member Posts: 122
    Originally posted by Apraxis
    Originally posted by wsmar
    Originally posted by Apraxis

    Ok.. in this thread everything is rather blurred, full with wrong information, and misleading.

    Noone talks about that there are not different roles in combat and you have not any tactical dependency on each other, because it will be absolutely possible to have different roles and dependency on each other in EQN.(Quote below)

    They just cut out the aggro/taunt mechanism.. and this mechanism simplified almost everything. Because the Tank got this magic ability to get attacked from all mobs. And because that simple mechnism, the Healer could entirely focus on healing the Main Tank and everyone else could do Dmg without worrying about anything else. And that is refered as the holy trinity. It is not about the lack of roles, it is about the lack of the old aggro/taunt mechanism.

    And they think to get rid off that "taunt/aggro" mechanism because they want utilize their new AI.

     


    Originally from Jeff Butler @EQN Class Panel from http://everquestnext.wikia.com/wiki/Classes

     

    I think one thing that you’ll see from us and we’ll demonstrate this as we get deeper into combat, is that we have a very detailed and intricate plan for moving around and fighting. The NPCs are capable of executing strategy and tactics and you’ll require your own intricate tactics to overcome them. We are saying that no one specific role or pair of roles is required in unlocking the strategy to defeating an encounter. 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…
     


     
    So the comparsion to GW2 is far off. In GW2 you do not only have no taunt/aggro mechanism, you also do not have any healer(miniheals and self heal is no real healing). And you also do not have anyone with serious Crowd Controll.

     

    If you really want to compare EQN combat(albeit we don't know any specifics) you should better compare it with GW1. (8 Skills, Real Healer, Real CC, no taunt/aggro)

    But please stop simplifying things or talk about things noone ever said, nor anything in the slightest is "fact" about it.

     

     

     

    That quote proves nothing really. In fact it sounds more like GW2 than what you seem to think it does. The quote you took was worded very very carefully. They don't say that there are healers, or tanks, or dps, and something interesting to note is that they say there isn't one solution to winning a battle. Wow does that sound a lot like GW2. GW2 also claimed to have roles and also claimed to not have 1 solution to every problem (which was true because the holy trinity wasn't present).

     

    It's funny really. SOE live was so hyped up, and yet we barely learned anything about the game. We are about as informationless as we were before.

    Again not really true. Anet said before GW2 release that they want to get rid off the Healer. They explicitly said it.. and they have done it.. and we all see what happend then. And they also get off any real Crowd Controll Class..

    Let's assume you would have a real Healer in GW2, even without any tank. Do you think every group combat would be completely different? I would say YES. It would be a complete different game. The same would be true with a real Crowd Controll Class.

    They did explicitly say that. They said they wanted to make a game that didn't have the holy trinity, essentially because they wanted to. Don't you think it is interesting that SOE has declined to talk about whether or not they'd have a holy trinity like system? They've been exceedingly vague about it. That quote you used was the definition of being vague.

     

    I also want to clarify here that a "tank" doesn't have to have a threat mechanic. That's not what a tank is. A tank is a player that can take a lot of damage. That is the definition I've always gone by. They aren't called tanks because they can "taunt" monsters.

  • GardavsshadeGardavsshade Member UncommonPosts: 907
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by whiteoak21

    well if i guess right in eqn maybe there will be taunt like many mmorpg but

    i don't think it will work against intelligent monster.

    if the ai is done correctly monsters will try to kill the healer first and the tank last

     

    Well it really depends.

    lets say their AI is really something.

    I say to the monster that i was with his wife yesterday which is actually true.

    My character is dwarf and opponent is elf.

    I have low charisma and opponent hates me.

    Opponent hates my red clothes.

    Or really intelligent AI and monster has 1 intelligence so he attacks anything.

    etc...

    OR maybe PAL-18 is correct and the Mobs are smarter and do attack the Healer first...

    Solution? The Tank has to be better and more alert, and be a better Tank.

    HOWEVER..............

    That would make sense if MMOs now were made for MMO Gamers.

    Hint: MMOs are NOT made for MMO Gamers anymore. They are made for People that have never played before, they are marketed to them, they are designed for them.

    That would work if most Players NOW would even being willing to play as a part of a Trinity style group, most Player are NOT willing to do that now. Few desire to fill the roles of Tanks or Healers, most just want to DPS (I remember in a few MMOs years ago when trying to get a DPS Player was the hard part)

    Smedley already let that "cat out of the bag" when he said EQN was not being made as a sequel to EQ or EQ2.... ANY story in Norrath would be acceptable to most EQ and EQ2 fans even if it was a parallel universe story or other.

    No. EQN won't need a Trinity because they are breaking the mold and making a new kind of game. I even dare to say it won't be classifiable as a MMORPG or even a MMO as we know them. It will be something new and different, for a new and different customer base so as to not pull Players from EQ and EQ2. THAT's why they showed so little so far. There is going to be a tantrum from the Players and they know it. They are hyping EQN to reach the customer base they really want and we are helping them!!

    I bet the Devs have running bets on how long we will lament and cry about all this once we see it at EQN release. I wonder who the winner will be....

  • ApraxisApraxis Member UncommonPosts: 1,509
    Originally posted by wsmar
    Originally posted by Apraxis
    Originally posted by wsmar
    Originally posted by Apraxis

    Ok.. in this thread everything is rather blurred, full with wrong information, and misleading.

    Noone talks about that there are not different roles in combat and you have not any tactical dependency on each other, because it will be absolutely possible to have different roles and dependency on each other in EQN.(Quote below)

    They just cut out the aggro/taunt mechanism.. and this mechanism simplified almost everything. Because the Tank got this magic ability to get attacked from all mobs. And because that simple mechnism, the Healer could entirely focus on healing the Main Tank and everyone else could do Dmg without worrying about anything else. And that is refered as the holy trinity. It is not about the lack of roles, it is about the lack of the old aggro/taunt mechanism.

    And they think to get rid off that "taunt/aggro" mechanism because they want utilize their new AI.

     


    Originally from Jeff Butler @EQN Class Panel from http://everquestnext.wikia.com/wiki/Classes

     

    I think one thing that you’ll see from us and we’ll demonstrate this as we get deeper into combat, is that we have a very detailed and intricate plan for moving around and fighting. The NPCs are capable of executing strategy and tactics and you’ll require your own intricate tactics to overcome them. We are saying that no one specific role or pair of roles is required in unlocking the strategy to defeating an encounter. 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…
     


     
    So the comparsion to GW2 is far off. In GW2 you do not only have no taunt/aggro mechanism, you also do not have any healer(miniheals and self heal is no real healing). And you also do not have anyone with serious Crowd Controll.

     

    If you really want to compare EQN combat(albeit we don't know any specifics) you should better compare it with GW1. (8 Skills, Real Healer, Real CC, no taunt/aggro)

    But please stop simplifying things or talk about things noone ever said, nor anything in the slightest is "fact" about it.

     

     

     

    That quote proves nothing really. In fact it sounds more like GW2 than what you seem to think it does. The quote you took was worded very very carefully. They don't say that there are healers, or tanks, or dps, and something interesting to note is that they say there isn't one solution to winning a battle. Wow does that sound a lot like GW2. GW2 also claimed to have roles and also claimed to not have 1 solution to every problem (which was true because the holy trinity wasn't present).

     

    It's funny really. SOE live was so hyped up, and yet we barely learned anything about the game. We are about as informationless as we were before.

    Again not really true. Anet said before GW2 release that they want to get rid off the Healer. They explicitly said it.. and they have done it.. and we all see what happend then. And they also get off any real Crowd Controll Class..

    Let's assume you would have a real Healer in GW2, even without any tank. Do you think every group combat would be completely different? I would say YES. It would be a complete different game. The same would be true with a real Crowd Controll Class.

    They did explicitly say that. They said they wanted to make a game that didn't have the holy trinity, essentially because they wanted to. Don't you think it is interesting that SOE has declined to talk about whether or not they'd have a holy trinity like system? They've been exceedingly vague about it. That quote you used was the definition of being vague.

    Yeap. But, they didn't want to talk about any class in specific. Or do we more then a little bit about those warrior and wizard from the demo. Thats it. Maybe they do not have every class finished. Maybe they do not have any skill, any role set in stone.

    But they did not say that there is no healer. Or no crowd control.

  • SwaneaSwanea Member UncommonPosts: 2,401

    Nothing promotes playing alone more then a total lack of trinity, as like in GW2.

    "Oh look, A huge raid boss who will take 30 people to kill! Let me go kill it....

    Wow, look at all these other players! Good thing I don't need to group or associate with them at all since I can pretty much do everything myself.  This way I can't easily meet new players, see their skill and let them see mine, or have to have any social interaction whatsoever!'

    I could care less about your "NEW AI" or anything.  Having to rely on a small group of others for GROUP combat (Ya know, stuff that actually requires a group and not the solo areas of the game) makes SENSE in an MMO.

    Great. You can fight that boss solo and survive.  But you still needed others around.  Except now you can safely ignore them in games like GW2 and seemingly EQN.

     

    Sweet, you can roll and dodge! Way more skill!

     

    Honestly, the "soft" trinity in GW1 blows gw2 "lolzerg" out of the water.

  • DaakenDaaken Member Posts: 158
    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.

    Very nice, thanks for sharing this OP.  Agree with  Mr. Green on this as well, I told my guildies months ago Storybricks is a game changer and I knew I was right.

    Random Forum Poster: I want an MMO that is different, original and fun.

    Me: So you want something like EQN

    Them: Nah dude, I want a Holy Trinity, Tab Target combat, Instanced Raiding, and Rigid classes.

    Me: Double Facepalm.

  • SekkrahSekkrah Member Posts: 11
    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.

    I'm looking forward to the game but in all honesty, the AI system of EQ Next is NOT original nor their own design.  The AI system being used was designed in the mid '90's by Raph Koster for Ultima Online, although the scrapped it before going live. If you Google his blog he has pages detailing how it works behind the scenes, and EQN is using his design almost exactly.

  • onlinenow25onlinenow25 Member UncommonPosts: 305
    Originally posted by ste2000
    Originally posted by Foomerang

    I thought Holy Trinity came about because people enjoyed specialized roles in a group. Maybe thats not why it came about, but I think thats a big reason why it has stuck around for so long.

    It came about because of the RPG games (damn them!), I blame Baldurs Gate.

    Yes RPG, ROLE playing games, where a player plays a frikking ROLE!

    Players like to play Roles, that's why they play RPGs and MMORPGs

    But don't tell Arenanet and SoE devs, they might not cope with the news!

    And your ROLE can be anything and everything you want.  

    I never took ROLE to mean a literal ROLE, I took it as my ROLE in the WORLD.  See how that works?

  • SephirosoSephiroso Member RarePosts: 2,019
    Originally posted by Daaken
    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.

    Very nice, thanks for sharing this OP.  Agree with  Mr. Green on this as well, I told my guildies months ago Storybricks is a game changer and I knew I was right.

    you seen detailed videos showing off the improved AI in combat? care to share with the rest of us since you know you were right.

    image
    Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!

  • GardavsshadeGardavsshade Member UncommonPosts: 907
    Originally posted by Swanea

    Nothing promotes playing alone more then a total lack of trinity, as like in GW2.

    "Oh look, A huge raid boss who will take 30 people to kill! Let me go kill it....

    Wow, look at all these other players! Good thing I don't need to group or associate with them at all since I can pretty much do everything myself.  This way I can't easily meet new players, see their skill and let them see mine, or have to have any social interaction whatsoever!'

    I could care less about your "NEW AI" or anything.  Having to rely on a small group of others for GROUP combat (Ya know, stuff that actually requires a group and not the solo areas of the game) makes SENSE in an MMO.

    Great. You can fight that boss solo and survive.  But you still needed others around.  Except now you can safely ignore them in games like GW2 and seemingly EQN.

     

    Sweet, you can roll and dodge! Way more skill!

     

    Honestly, the "soft" trinity in GW1 blows gw2 "lolzerg" out of the water.

    Not only that but if a Player gets into trouble "alone" the Devs have conveniently provided a Cash Shop ingame with all the solutions they need...

    How wonderful.

    (That's another reason the trinity is not wanted by the Devs. The more Players play alone, they more likely they will reach for the "easy and quick" solution by using the Cash Shop.)

    Smedley and SOE is going to play us all and laugh all the way to the bank.

  • wsmarwsmar Member Posts: 122
    Originally posted by Apraxis
    Originally posted by wsmar
    Originally posted by Apraxis
    Originally posted by wsmar
    Originally posted by Apraxis

    Ok.. in this thread everything is rather blurred, full with wrong information, and misleading.

    Noone talks about that there are not different roles in combat and you have not any tactical dependency on each other, because it will be absolutely possible to have different roles and dependency on each other in EQN.(Quote below)

    They just cut out the aggro/taunt mechanism.. and this mechanism simplified almost everything. Because the Tank got this magic ability to get attacked from all mobs. And because that simple mechnism, the Healer could entirely focus on healing the Main Tank and everyone else could do Dmg without worrying about anything else. And that is refered as the holy trinity. It is not about the lack of roles, it is about the lack of the old aggro/taunt mechanism.

    And they think to get rid off that "taunt/aggro" mechanism because they want utilize their new AI.

     


    Originally from Jeff Butler @EQN Class Panel from http://everquestnext.wikia.com/wiki/Classes

     

    I think one thing that you’ll see from us and we’ll demonstrate this as we get deeper into combat, is that we have a very detailed and intricate plan for moving around and fighting. The NPCs are capable of executing strategy and tactics and you’ll require your own intricate tactics to overcome them. We are saying that no one specific role or pair of roles is required in unlocking the strategy to defeating an encounter. 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…
     


     
    So the comparsion to GW2 is far off. In GW2 you do not only have no taunt/aggro mechanism, you also do not have any healer(miniheals and self heal is no real healing). And you also do not have anyone with serious Crowd Controll.

     

    If you really want to compare EQN combat(albeit we don't know any specifics) you should better compare it with GW1. (8 Skills, Real Healer, Real CC, no taunt/aggro)

    But please stop simplifying things or talk about things noone ever said, nor anything in the slightest is "fact" about it.

     

     

     

    That quote proves nothing really. In fact it sounds more like GW2 than what you seem to think it does. The quote you took was worded very very carefully. They don't say that there are healers, or tanks, or dps, and something interesting to note is that they say there isn't one solution to winning a battle. Wow does that sound a lot like GW2. GW2 also claimed to have roles and also claimed to not have 1 solution to every problem (which was true because the holy trinity wasn't present).

     

    It's funny really. SOE live was so hyped up, and yet we barely learned anything about the game. We are about as informationless as we were before.

    Again not really true. Anet said before GW2 release that they want to get rid off the Healer. They explicitly said it.. and they have done it.. and we all see what happend then. And they also get off any real Crowd Controll Class..

    Let's assume you would have a real Healer in GW2, even without any tank. Do you think every group combat would be completely different? I would say YES. It would be a complete different game. The same would be true with a real Crowd Controll Class.

    They did explicitly say that. They said they wanted to make a game that didn't have the holy trinity, essentially because they wanted to. Don't you think it is interesting that SOE has declined to talk about whether or not they'd have a holy trinity like system? They've been exceedingly vague about it. That quote you used was the definition of being vague.

    Yeap. But, they didn't want to talk about any class in specific. Or do we more then a little bit about those warrior and wizard from the demo. Thats it. Maybe they do not have every class finished. Maybe they do not have any skill, any role set in stone.

    But they did not say that there is no healer. Or no crowd control.

    There's one statement that really sticks out to me though.  "We are saying that no one specific role or pair of roles is required in unlocking the strategy to defeating an encounter."

    That sounds exactly like something we've heard before from ANet. That is a scary statement. Even if we don't have the full trinity, I really hope there is a healing class. The fact that they'd make a statement like that though, almost makes it sound as if there isn't a healer.

     

    Maybe there are different variations of healers and that's why they were able to make that statement, I don't know. However, the whole point of the argument I'm trying to make is that they are being very careful with their words, and they are being very careful with the information they are releasing. I assume they are doing it for a reason. I'm trying to entertain the other side of the argument, because there is a possibility that it is there. We don't know anything for sure, and to bank on something now and get our hopes up later would be sad. People do it with every game.

  • BrialynBrialyn Member Posts: 184

    I hope they are able to accomplish this. The issue could be that the people who enjoy healing and tank roles will be shafted. Honestly when I heard about the no trinity thing in GW2 I was excited.  The more I play though, the more I miss it. But as it as been pointed out there are other games where they can play in their particular style so I'll be getting my healer gameplay in FFXIV.

    I know everyone is saying that GW2 AI isn't going to be like EQN  so I hope it won't have the same dungeon experience as GW2 (if it has dungeons at all).  Running GW2 dungeons for me was akin to gouging my eye out with a spoon.  Die, respawn, runback, pew pew, die, respawn, run back, pew-pew, die, respawn, run back, pew pew. Rinse and repeat until you got the boss down. Frankly I found that more dull than mashing one button over and over.  I haven't been able to stomach the idea of stepping back into a dungeon in GW2.  It was an idea I wanted to like but the delivery just wasn't up to my standards.  There are a LOT of people who like it though.  Personally, the more differences there are in games on the market the better for us so I welcome the change. 


    image
    Currently Playing: FFXIV:ARR
    Looking Forward to: Wildstar
  • PAL-18PAL-18 Member UncommonPosts: 844
    Originally posted by Apraxis
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by Apraxis

    Ok.. in this thread everything is rather blurred, full with wrong information, and misleading.

    Noone talks about that there are not different roles in combat and you have not any tactical dependency on each other, because it will be absolutely possible to have different roles and dependency on each other in EQN.(Quote below)

    They just cut out the aggro/taunt mechanism.. and this mechanism simplified almost everything. Because the Tank got this magic ability to get attacked from all mobs. And because that simple mechnism, the Healer could entirely focus on healing the Main Tank and everyone else could do Dmg without worrying about anything else. And that is refered as the holy trinity. It is not about the lack of roles, it is about the lack of the old aggro/taunt mechanism.

    And they think to get rid off that "taunt/aggro" mechanism because they want utilize their new AI.

     


    Originally from Jeff Butler @EQN Class Panel from http://everquestnext.wikia.com/wiki/Classes

     

    I think one thing that you’ll see from us and we’ll demonstrate this as we get deeper into combat, is that we have a very detailed and intricate plan for moving around and fighting. The NPCs are capable of executing strategy and tactics and you’ll require your own intricate tactics to overcome them. We are saying that no one specific role or pair of roles is required in unlocking the strategy to defeating an encounter. 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…
     


     
    So the comparsion to GW2 is far off. In GW2 you do not only have no taunt/aggro mechanism, you also do not have any healer(miniheals and self heal is no real healing). And you also do not have anyone with serious Crowd Controll.

     

    If you really want to compare EQN combat(albeit we don't know any specifics) you should better compare it with GW1. (8 Skills, Real Healer, Real CC, no taunt/aggro)

    But please stop simplifying things or talk about things noone ever said, nor anything in the slightest is "fact" about it.

     

    But arent you forgetting something in here,Heals and dps does taunting also.

    Or for example charming in some games and when mob gets released he will attack you for the rest of his life etc.

     

    No.. they create aggro. But not so much as the taunt abiltity from the tank. Because of that the holy trinty works. If it wouldn't you will have EQN. Because in EQN every Mob will have some Aggro Tables(who is the most dangerous, who is the most easiest to kill, where is nearest, or whatever).. and that is all the difference. You will have healers, you will have Crowd Control, and all roles we are familar with.. and maybe more.. 40 classes are a lot of possibilities for different roles.

    -Spell:

    Izgimmer's Last Word Icon  Attempts to utterly destroy the target, inflicting 4,118-8,907 points of damage.

    On Use     Target     Hit     Health     Radiation -4118 .. -8907     
        Target     Taunt         15646    

    Nice description there,if i were that target ,i would be a bit mad too ,to someone who just tried to destroy me.

    -And nice taunting tool,because of the description ,which tells alot why taunting is taunting.

    Library of Foul Language Icon This item helps the cyborg taunting enemies onto itself by uttering insulting phrases in whatever language the attacker speaks. 'Language' in this context might include:
    - Making gestures and faces
    - Hitting where it hurts
    - Producing odours that annoy the assailant.
    Due to this complexity the item can only be utilized by the Enforcer profession.

    On Activate     Self     AddSkill     Psychology     3     
    On Use     User     Lock     Psychology     6s     
        Float     Text     Look at me!     
        Target     Taunt         850    

    Sure most of the games are dumbed down to the point where noone cant overtaunt tanks,but that is another story.

    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/ **

  • r0guyr0guy Member Posts: 115
    Originally posted by wsmar
    Originally posted by r0guy
    Originally posted by wsmar
    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.

     

    I'd really like to know what will differentiate EQN from the "primitive" AI we've seen in the past.

     

    There is nothing more dynamic than PvP, and the trinity works wonders. I have a hard time understanding why they believe the trinity system is "primitive" because it was used in old games. That's like saying Quantum Mechanics is "primitive" because we discovered it back in the 20s, yet we are constantly finding new ways to use it.

     

    Can anyone honestly give a good counter response to that? I'd love to hear it. I'm not trying to sound cocky or arrogant, I'm actually very intrigued.

     

    I'll bite.

    What they've said so far about the AI is pretty darn different to what we've seen. The orcs not spawning in camps, but making choices about where they go depending on likes/dislikes is radical. But it's just words for now so I'll skip that point.

    In the MMOs I've played like WOW/SWTOR/WAR/EVE the PVP never relied on the trinity to work. So I'd love to know what you meant by that. Rogue/MAGE/Priest was almost always the best setup for 3V3 WoW arenas and i don't see a tank in it, for example.

    You guys seriously need to stop with the misquotes here, the devs never said it was primitive because it was old. There are lots of "old" things that'll still be in the the game.

    You honestly believe that these Orcs are actually going to have likes and dislikes? Apparently SOE has surpassed the AI the leading scientists in the world use when they try to create "smart" robots. It's programmed that way. Just like GW2's "dynamic" events were programmed to look "dynamic". The fact that the even use the word Artificial Intelligence continuely bothers me.

     

    You don't think WAR's PvP was dependent on the holy trinity? Are you serious? If that was truly the case, WAR would have been the ranged cluster fuck that GW2 was. That's silly. I'm talking about open world pvp, not instanced battlegrounds and scenarios. Even then, having a good healer, a good tank, and a good dps in PvP battlegrounds and scenarios made the world of difference.

     

    Errrm, this isn't Science fiction, this is 10 year old stuff at least. What's funny is that MMOs have been so far behind the curve that people actually think this is hard stuff to do. "Likes" and "dislikes" is a simplified term.

     

    Having an Orc AI, wandering off somewhere where there are X amount less guards but requires Y amount of players if Z amounts of orcs die in their current vicinity, isn't hard to do at all....

    Or if target didnt die after 5 minutes of hitting it, go for highest damage dealer if X, go for healer if Y or try your luck with low health target Z...

    As it is now, at least in wow, it's spot player > run to player coordinates > rotate given abilities.Without exagerating, this isn't even a step above Pacman ghosts...

     

    To your second point. Perhaps because examples from OW PVP are irrelevant? If we're talking trinity, we're talking dungeons and raids wich are closed, controlled environments just like battlegrounds and arenas. Unless I'm missing something?

     

  • ApraxisApraxis Member UncommonPosts: 1,509
    Originally posted by wsmar

    There's one statement that really sticks out to me though.  "We are saying that no one specific role or pair of roles is required in unlocking the strategy to defeating an encounter."

    That sounds exactly like something we've heard before from ANet. That is a scary statement. Even if we don't have the full trinity, I really hope there is a healing class. The fact that they'd make a statement like that though, almost makes it sound as if there isn't a healer.

     

    Maybe there are different variations of healers and that's why they were able to make that statement, I don't know. However, the whole point of the argument I'm trying to make is that they are being very careful with their words, and they are being very careful with the information they are releasing. I assume they are doing it for a reason. I'm trying to entertain the other side of the argument, because there is a possibility that it is there. We don't know anything for sure, and to bank on something now and get our hopes up later would be sad. People do it with every game.

    Truth is.. we don't know enough to make any assumptions. And yeap.. there could be different solutions for a target.. but all that does not mean that there is no healer. Like in DAoC it was entirely possible, and even effective in some circumstances to just run with Paladins. (the paladin in DAoC don't got a heal, but could trigger a healing aura.. small heal every 6 sec.)

    Or to use some Pets as Tank (Kabalist was very well known for that in DAoC). But as long as we have all thinkable roles (like healer, crowd control, and more) it is just an advantage to have more options. And we as player will have to find out works best.. and maybe it will come down to the god old trinity in most cases. But to assume it is like GW2 is really jumping to conclusion.

  • wsmarwsmar Member Posts: 122
    Originally posted by r0guy
    Originally posted by wsmar
    Originally posted by r0guy
    Originally posted by wsmar
    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.

     

    I'd really like to know what will differentiate EQN from the "primitive" AI we've seen in the past.

     

    There is nothing more dynamic than PvP, and the trinity works wonders. I have a hard time understanding why they believe the trinity system is "primitive" because it was used in old games. That's like saying Quantum Mechanics is "primitive" because we discovered it back in the 20s, yet we are constantly finding new ways to use it.

     

    Can anyone honestly give a good counter response to that? I'd love to hear it. I'm not trying to sound cocky or arrogant, I'm actually very intrigued.

     

    I'll bite.

    What they've said so far about the AI is pretty darn different to what we've seen. The orcs not spawning in camps, but making choices about where they go depending on likes/dislikes is radical. But it's just words for now so I'll skip that point.

    In the MMOs I've played like WOW/SWTOR/WAR/EVE the PVP never relied on the trinity to work. So I'd love to know what you meant by that. Rogue/MAGE/Priest was almost always the best setup for 3V3 WoW arenas and i don't see a tank in it, for example.

    You guys seriously need to stop with the misquotes here, the devs never said it was primitive because it was old. There are lots of "old" things that'll still be in the the game.

    You honestly believe that these Orcs are actually going to have likes and dislikes? Apparently SOE has surpassed the AI the leading scientists in the world use when they try to create "smart" robots. It's programmed that way. Just like GW2's "dynamic" events were programmed to look "dynamic". The fact that the even use the word Artificial Intelligence continuely bothers me.

     

    You don't think WAR's PvP was dependent on the holy trinity? Are you serious? If that was truly the case, WAR would have been the ranged cluster fuck that GW2 was. That's silly. I'm talking about open world pvp, not instanced battlegrounds and scenarios. Even then, having a good healer, a good tank, and a good dps in PvP battlegrounds and scenarios made the world of difference.

     

    Errrm, this isn't Science fiction, this is 10 year old stuff at least. What's funny is that MMOs have been so far behind the curve that people actually think this is hard stuff to do. "Likes" and "dislikes" is a simplified term.

     

    Having an Orc AI, wandering off somewhere where there are X amount less guards but requires Y amount of players if Z amounts of orcs die in their current vicinity, isn't hard to do at all....

    Or if target didnt die after 5 minutes of hitting it, go for highest damage dealer if X, go for healer if Y or try your luck with low health target Z...

    As it is now, at least in wow, it's spot player > run to player coordinates > rotate given abilities.Without exagerating, this isn't even a step above Pacman ghosts...

     

    To your second point. Perhaps because examples from OW PVP are irrelevant? If we're talking trinity, we're talking dungeons and raids wich are closed, controlled environments just like battlegrounds and arenas. Unless I'm missing something?

     

    You pretty much answered my question the way I expected you too. What you described is not under any circumstances artificial intelligence. The program is basically shooting values through a function, and then based on what those values are determine where the orc goes. The Orc is not actually making an intelligent decision, it is merely going to the only places it is programmed to go to. That isn't AI. That word is misused in the gaming industry.

     

    If you think OW PvP is irrelevant then we can talk strictly about battlegrounds. Let me answer this differently then, since we are specifically talking about battlegrounds. No, the scenarios, and battlegrounds did not require the holy trinity per say to work, but if the point is to just make them work, then what's the point of making a game. Something that works doesn't necessarily equate to being fun. I personally along with many other people didn't enjoy GW2's battlegrounds at all. Unlike WAR's scenarios, your allies in GW2 couldn't aid you in the same effect. You might as well just be doing 1 v 1's in GW2 because there was no dependence on the rest of your team. At their core, every class was the same. I realize we are dealing with a different game and with limited knowledge of said game, but the possibility it still there.

     

     

Sign In or Register to comment.