Howdy, Stranger!

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

Defining the Trinity

1234579

Comments

  • PAL-18PAL-18 Member UncommonPosts: 844
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by PAL-18

    Originally posted by Malabooga

    Originally posted by PAL-18

    Trinity is like playing chess.

    Chess without trinity is like playing with soldiers only.

     

     

    Yeah, everyone gets mad at that pawn and mindlessly attack ti while it gets healed by bishop while rook and queen range opposing pieces from bacline and nothing can get passed by that pawn in any way because it has all the aggro.

    Just like chess rofl.

    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard

    Originally posted by PAL-18

    Trinity is like playing chess.

    Chess without trinity is like playing with soldiers only.

    I don't remember any threat/aggro mecanic in chess. The opponent is usually smart enough not to attack the most well protected piece instead of the weakest one.

    Just take it like this,King = tank and then you have support roles and attackers

    Like holy trinity,we have suppopt roles,tank and attackers and cc and kiting etc.

    Thats what makes holy trinity interesting like chess,some people can play as healer but cant handle for example tanking or vice verca etc..

     

     

    Yeah, i regularly tank with my king in chess. *facepalm"

    You just made my day.

    Thats the difference of the mindset you need in holy trinity,you support your tank or it will die.

    But obviously you lack that kind of mindset.

    That's probably why both Malabooga and myself are better chess players than you...

    PS: I'm always playing tank in trinity based games. But your analogy with chess just doesn't make any sense.

    Exactly.

    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/ **

  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by PAL-18

    Originally posted by Malabooga

    Originally posted by PAL-18

    Trinity is like playing chess.

    Chess without trinity is like playing with soldiers only.

     

     

    Yeah, everyone gets mad at that pawn and mindlessly attack ti while it gets healed by bishop while rook and queen range opposing pieces from bacline and nothing can get passed by that pawn in any way because it has all the aggro.

    Just like chess rofl.

    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard

    Originally posted by PAL-18

    Trinity is like playing chess.

    Chess without trinity is like playing with soldiers only.

    I don't remember any threat/aggro mecanic in chess. The opponent is usually smart enough not to attack the most well protected piece instead of the weakest one.

    Just take it like this,King = tank and then you have support roles and attackers

    Like holy trinity,we have suppopt roles,tank and attackers and cc and kiting etc.

    Thats what makes holy trinity interesting like chess,some people can play as healer but cant handle for example tanking or vice verca etc..

     

     

    Yeah, i regularly tank with my king in chess. *facepalm"

    You just made my day.

    Thats the difference of the mindset you need in holy trinity,you support your tank or it will die.

    But obviously you lack that kind of mindset.

    That's probably why both Malabooga and myself are better chess players than you...

    PS: I'm always playing tank in trinity based games. But your analogy with chess just doesn't make any sense.

    Exactly.

    Im glad you understood how there can be roles without arbitrary threat/taunt mechanic and how trinity as it stands (and how it stood for 15 years) is pretty hilarious mechanic and how classes dont have to be pigeonholed to single role (gimped) and have different role even with same set of skills.

    GW2 is pretty much "chess" gameplay in its core.

  • Sam_ShakuskySam_Shakusky Member CommonPosts: 15

    Imagine a game with no threat table and with bodyblocking. Imagine a character in that game with high HP and defense stats, with any configuration out of interrupt skills, a way to shield allies, attacks of oppotunity or other penalties for being ignored in melee, and ways to change the position of the other participants in the fight. Is that character still a tank? To me, yes, (with CC on the side). Would that character still form a trinity with a healer and a dps? For me, yes.

    Why is the threat table the discriminant? Aren't tanks defined by their ability to draw attacks and survive them at a good rate? Couldn't the hypothetical character described above do just that (if played correctly)?

  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    Originally posted by Sam_Shakusky

    Imagine a game with no threat table and with bodyblocking. Imagine a character in that game with high HP and defense stats, with any configuration out of interrupt skills, a way to shield allies, attacks of oppotunity or other penalties for being ignored in melee, and ways to change the position of the other participants in the fight. Is that character still a tank? To me, yes, (with CC on the side). Would that character still form a trinity with a healer and a dps? For me, yes.

    Why is the threat table the discriminant? Aren't tanks defined by their ability to draw attacks and survive them at a good rate? Couldn't the hypothetical character described above do just that (if played correctly)?

    "Imagine a game"

    When you go into imagination territory, well, anything is possible.

    Scope of thread is what trinity actually is. Calling something that doesnt exist trinity is pointles.

  • PAL-18PAL-18 Member UncommonPosts: 844
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by PAL-18

    Originally posted by Malabooga

    Originally posted by PAL-18

    Trinity is like playing chess.

    Chess without trinity is like playing with soldiers only.

     

     

    Yeah, everyone gets mad at that pawn and mindlessly attack ti while it gets healed by bishop while rook and queen range opposing pieces from bacline and nothing can get passed by that pawn in any way because it has all the aggro.

    Just like chess rofl.

    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard

    Originally posted by PAL-18

    Trinity is like playing chess.

    Chess without trinity is like playing with soldiers only.

    I don't remember any threat/aggro mecanic in chess. The opponent is usually smart enough not to attack the most well protected piece instead of the weakest one.

    Just take it like this,King = tank and then you have support roles and attackers

    Like holy trinity,we have suppopt roles,tank and attackers and cc and kiting etc.

    Thats what makes holy trinity interesting like chess,some people can play as healer but cant handle for example tanking or vice verca etc..

     

     

    Yeah, i regularly tank with my king in chess. *facepalm"

    You just made my day.

    Thats the difference of the mindset you need in holy trinity,you support your tank or it will die.

    But obviously you lack that kind of mindset.

    That's probably why both Malabooga and myself are better chess players than you...

    PS: I'm always playing tank in trinity based games. But your analogy with chess just doesn't make any sense.

    Exactly.

    Im glad you understood how there can be roles without arbitrary threat/taunt mechanic and how trinity as it stands (and how it stood for 15 years) is pretty hilarious mechanic and how classes dont have to be pigeonholed to single role (gimped) and have different role even with same set of skills.

    GW2 is pretty much "chess" gameplay in its core.

    Yes,you are absolutely right,there can be all kind of games without different roles just like chess played with only soldiers in table,but it doesnt make any sense to play like that.

    But i think i allready said that.

     

    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/ **

  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by PAL-18

    Originally posted by Malabooga

    Originally posted by PAL-18

    Trinity is like playing chess.

    Chess without trinity is like playing with soldiers only.

     

     

    Yeah, everyone gets mad at that pawn and mindlessly attack ti while it gets healed by bishop while rook and queen range opposing pieces from bacline and nothing can get passed by that pawn in any way because it has all the aggro.

    Just like chess rofl.

    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard

    Originally posted by PAL-18

    Trinity is like playing chess.

    Chess without trinity is like playing with soldiers only.

    I don't remember any threat/aggro mecanic in chess. The opponent is usually smart enough not to attack the most well protected piece instead of the weakest one.

    Just take it like this,King = tank and then you have support roles and attackers

    Like holy trinity,we have suppopt roles,tank and attackers and cc and kiting etc.

    Thats what makes holy trinity interesting like chess,some people can play as healer but cant handle for example tanking or vice verca etc..

     

     

    Yeah, i regularly tank with my king in chess. *facepalm"

    You just made my day.

    Thats the difference of the mindset you need in holy trinity,you support your tank or it will die.

    But obviously you lack that kind of mindset.

    That's probably why both Malabooga and myself are better chess players than you...

    PS: I'm always playing tank in trinity based games. But your analogy with chess just doesn't make any sense.

    Exactly.

    Im glad you understood how there can be roles without arbitrary threat/taunt mechanic and how trinity as it stands (and how it stood for 15 years) is pretty hilarious mechanic and how classes dont have to be pigeonholed to single role (gimped) and have different role even with same set of skills.

    GW2 is pretty much "chess" gameplay in its core.

    Yes,you are absolutely right,there can be all kind of games without different roles just like chess played with only soldiers in table,but it doesnt make any sense to play like that.

    But i think i allready said that.

     

    *facepalm*

    chess isnt played with only soldiers and no piece is pigeonholed in single role, any piece can be any role at any given time and threat is assesed on move by move basis not some imaginary mechanic that makes you attack certain piece while losing the game in the process.

    Im sorry, i assumed you understood that, but i was wrong, your very poor understanding of chess is evident.

  • PAL-18PAL-18 Member UncommonPosts: 844
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by PAL-18

    Originally posted by Malabooga

    Originally posted by PAL-18

    Trinity is like playing chess.

    Chess without trinity is like playing with soldiers only.

     

     

    Yeah, everyone gets mad at that pawn and mindlessly attack ti while it gets healed by bishop while rook and queen range opposing pieces from bacline and nothing can get passed by that pawn in any way because it has all the aggro.

    Just like chess rofl.

    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard

    Originally posted by PAL-18

    Trinity is like playing chess.

    Chess without trinity is like playing with soldiers only.

    I don't remember any threat/aggro mecanic in chess. The opponent is usually smart enough not to attack the most well protected piece instead of the weakest one.

    Just take it like this,King = tank and then you have support roles and attackers

    Like holy trinity,we have suppopt roles,tank and attackers and cc and kiting etc.

    Thats what makes holy trinity interesting like chess,some people can play as healer but cant handle for example tanking or vice verca etc..

     

     

    Yeah, i regularly tank with my king in chess. *facepalm"

    You just made my day.

    Thats the difference of the mindset you need in holy trinity,you support your tank or it will die.

    But obviously you lack that kind of mindset.

    That's probably why both Malabooga and myself are better chess players than you...

    PS: I'm always playing tank in trinity based games. But your analogy with chess just doesn't make any sense.

    Exactly.

    Im glad you understood how there can be roles without arbitrary threat/taunt mechanic and how trinity as it stands (and how it stood for 15 years) is pretty hilarious mechanic and how classes dont have to be pigeonholed to single role (gimped) and have different role even with same set of skills.

    GW2 is pretty much "chess" gameplay in its core.

    Yes,you are absolutely right,there can be all kind of games without different roles just like chess played with only soldiers in table,but it doesnt make any sense to play like that.

    But i think i allready said that.

     

    *facepalm*

    chess isnt played with only soldiers and no piece is pigeonholed in single role, any piece can be any role at any given time and threat is assesed on move by move basis not some imaginary mechanic that makes you attack certain piece while losing the game in the process.

    Im sorry, i assumed you understood that, but i was wrong.

    You can ,but i cant imagine chess played with soldiers only.I find it far more interesting when theres more mechanics involved.

    Maybe thats what you dont understand ?

    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/ **

  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by PAL-18

    Originally posted by Malabooga

    Originally posted by PAL-18

    Trinity is like playing chess.

    Chess without trinity is like playing with soldiers only.

     

     

    Yeah, everyone gets mad at that pawn and mindlessly attack ti while it gets healed by bishop while rook and queen range opposing pieces from bacline and nothing can get passed by that pawn in any way because it has all the aggro.

    Just like chess rofl.

    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard

    Originally posted by PAL-18

    Trinity is like playing chess.

    Chess without trinity is like playing with soldiers only.

    I don't remember any threat/aggro mecanic in chess. The opponent is usually smart enough not to attack the most well protected piece instead of the weakest one.

    Just take it like this,King = tank and then you have support roles and attackers

    Like holy trinity,we have suppopt roles,tank and attackers and cc and kiting etc.

    Thats what makes holy trinity interesting like chess,some people can play as healer but cant handle for example tanking or vice verca etc..

     

     

    Yeah, i regularly tank with my king in chess. *facepalm"

    You just made my day.

    Thats the difference of the mindset you need in holy trinity,you support your tank or it will die.

    But obviously you lack that kind of mindset.

    That's probably why both Malabooga and myself are better chess players than you...

    PS: I'm always playing tank in trinity based games. But your analogy with chess just doesn't make any sense.

    Exactly.

    Im glad you understood how there can be roles without arbitrary threat/taunt mechanic and how trinity as it stands (and how it stood for 15 years) is pretty hilarious mechanic and how classes dont have to be pigeonholed to single role (gimped) and have different role even with same set of skills.

    GW2 is pretty much "chess" gameplay in its core.

    Yes,you are absolutely right,there can be all kind of games without different roles just like chess played with only soldiers in table,but it doesnt make any sense to play like that.

    But i think i allready said that.

     

    *facepalm*

    chess isnt played with only soldiers and no piece is pigeonholed in single role, any piece can be any role at any given time and threat is assesed on move by move basis not some imaginary mechanic that makes you attack certain piece while losing the game in the process.

    Im sorry, i assumed you understood that, but i was wrong.

    You can ,but i cant imagine chess played with soldiers only.I find it far more interesting when theres more mechanics involved.

    Maybe thats what you dont understand ?

    Imagining chess played with soldiers only (i presume you mean pawns) has absolutely no relevance to anything except your imagination.

    In GW2 roles are clearly defined (in high level play) and it has no trinity. It has no imaginary tank/threat/taunt mechanic. But classes are not gimped into single role and any class can be any role at any given moment just like in chess, based on "board" situation and threat is assesed by actual threat.

    So please, be so good to give example of MMO with "soldiers only" (i presume you mean no roles by that, but at this time youll have to expand on what "soldiers only" means to you)

  • PAL-18PAL-18 Member UncommonPosts: 844
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by PAL-18

    Originally posted by Malabooga

    Originally posted by PAL-18

    Trinity is like playing chess.

    Chess without trinity is like playing with soldiers only.

     

     

    Yeah, everyone gets mad at that pawn and mindlessly attack ti while it gets healed by bishop while rook and queen range opposing pieces from bacline and nothing can get passed by that pawn in any way because it has all the aggro.

    Just like chess rofl.

    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard

    Originally posted by PAL-18

    Trinity is like playing chess.

    Chess without trinity is like playing with soldiers only.

    I don't remember any threat/aggro mecanic in chess. The opponent is usually smart enough not to attack the most well protected piece instead of the weakest one.

    Just take it like this,King = tank and then you have support roles and attackers

    Like holy trinity,we have suppopt roles,tank and attackers and cc and kiting etc.

    Thats what makes holy trinity interesting like chess,some people can play as healer but cant handle for example tanking or vice verca etc..

     

     

    Yeah, i regularly tank with my king in chess. *facepalm"

    You just made my day.

    Thats the difference of the mindset you need in holy trinity,you support your tank or it will die.

    But obviously you lack that kind of mindset.

    That's probably why both Malabooga and myself are better chess players than you...

    PS: I'm always playing tank in trinity based games. But your analogy with chess just doesn't make any sense.

    Exactly.

    Im glad you understood how there can be roles without arbitrary threat/taunt mechanic and how trinity as it stands (and how it stood for 15 years) is pretty hilarious mechanic and how classes dont have to be pigeonholed to single role (gimped) and have different role even with same set of skills.

    GW2 is pretty much "chess" gameplay in its core.

    Yes,you are absolutely right,there can be all kind of games without different roles just like chess played with only soldiers in table,but it doesnt make any sense to play like that.

    But i think i allready said that.

     

    *facepalm*

    chess isnt played with only soldiers and no piece is pigeonholed in single role, any piece can be any role at any given time and threat is assesed on move by move basis not some imaginary mechanic that makes you attack certain piece while losing the game in the process.

    Im sorry, i assumed you understood that, but i was wrong.

    You can ,but i cant imagine chess played with soldiers only.I find it far more interesting when theres more mechanics involved.

    Maybe thats what you dont understand ?

    Imagining chess played with soldiers only (i presume you mean pawns) has absolutely no relevance to anything except your imagination.

    In GW2 roles are clearly defined (in high level play) and it has no trinity. It has no imaginary tank/threat/taunt mechanic. But classes are not gimped into single role and any class can be any role at any given moment just like in chess, based on "board" situation and threat is assesed by actual threat.

    So please, be so good to give example of MMO with "soldiers only" (i presume you mean no roles by that, but at this time youll have to expand on what "soldiers only" means to you)

    GW2 ?

    Tank / threat mechanic is imaginary only to you it seems.

    in chess we use it in many ways,we act like we are threatening someone and actualyl we are not because its part of the plan,we do it because that way we make opponent play as the way we want or atleast we hope so.

    in MMO holy trinity we do same kind of things,lets say healer is in danger,therefore we sacrifice soldier to take aggro and kite him,therefore our healer can play the way we want to but opponent does not want to.

    millions of possibilites,but obsolete in your GW2 because everybody is soldier.

     

    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/ **

  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    Originally posted by PAL-18

    GW2 ?

    Tank / threat/taunt mechanic is imaginary only to you it seems.

    in chess we use it in many ways,we act like we are threatening someone and actualyl we are not because its part of the plan,we do it because that way we make opponent play as the way we want or atleast we hope so.

    in MMO holy trinity we do same kind of things,lets say healer is in danger,therefore we sacrifice soldier to take aggro and kite him,therefore our healer can play the way we want to but opponent does not want to.

    millions of possibilites,but obsolete in your GW2 because everybody is soldier.

     

    lol, nope

    tank/threat is imaginary, you wont attack irrelevant piece and lose game because some arbitrary number

    again, refrain from chess examples because of evident lack of understanding it. Chess - you might have a plan, more you stick to it mindlessly greater chance youll lose, Trinity - you have a set steps and the better you stick to it greater chance of winning. You cant grasp this.

    you do no such thing in trinity, if you sacrifice your "soldier" youre dead. Theres no improvisation, randomness or any decision making, you either play by trinity rules or lose. And thats one way street.

    you see, when you have no clue what youre talking about, GW2 is chess like gameplay, thats whats hugely confusing you, trinity is opposite of chess in every way, it requires dumb AI to work

    sorry, if you didnt get it till now its opposite of what you think it is, its pointless, by now i think youre just intentionally playing .... since every post you make makes less and less sense

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

    GW2 ?

    Tank / threat mechanic is imaginary only to you it seems.

    in chess we use it in many ways,we act like we are threatening someone and actualyl we are not because its part of the plan,we do it because that way we make opponent play as the way we want or atleast we hope so.

    in MMO holy trinity we do same kind of things,lets say healer is in danger,therefore we sacrifice soldier to take aggro and kite him,therefore our healer can play the way we want to but opponent does not want to.

    millions of possibilites,but obsolete in your GW2 because everybody is soldier.

     

    lol, nope

    tank/threat is imaginary, you wont attack irrelevant piece and lose game because some arbitrary number

    again, refrain from chess examples because of evident lack of understanding it. Chess - you might have a plan, more you stick to it mindlessly greater chance youll lose, Triity - you have a play and the better you stick to it greater chance of winiing. You cant grasp this.

    you do no such thing in trinity, if you sacrifice your "soldier" youre dead

    you see, when you have no clue what youre talking about, GW2 is chess like gameplay, thats whats hugely confusing you, trinity is opposite of chess in every way, it requires dumb AI to work

    sorry, if you didnt get it till now its opposite of what you think it is, its pointless, by now i think youre just intentionally playing ....

    So if i play lets say vanilla WoW in team with rogues(soldiers) only,without tanks or healers ,it needs then super AI to work,therefore WoW is better than GW2,well i kinda agree with that.

    You dont seem understand that either,that when theres trinity you can play in many ways,healer team only,tank team only,mixed,whatever.

    its also something that you cant do when theres soldier only in table.

     

    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/ **

  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by PAL-18

    GW2 ?

    Tank / threat mechanic is imaginary only to you it seems.

    in chess we use it in many ways,we act like we are threatening someone and actualyl we are not because its part of the plan,we do it because that way we make opponent play as the way we want or atleast we hope so.

    in MMO holy trinity we do same kind of things,lets say healer is in danger,therefore we sacrifice soldier to take aggro and kite him,therefore our healer can play the way we want to but opponent does not want to.

    millions of possibilites,but obsolete in your GW2 because everybody is soldier.

     

    lol, nope

    tank/threat is imaginary, you wont attack irrelevant piece and lose game because some arbitrary number

    again, refrain from chess examples because of evident lack of understanding it. Chess - you might have a plan, more you stick to it mindlessly greater chance youll lose, Triity - you have a play and the better you stick to it greater chance of winiing. You cant grasp this.

    you do no such thing in trinity, if you sacrifice your "soldier" youre dead

    you see, when you have no clue what youre talking about, GW2 is chess like gameplay, thats whats hugely confusing you, trinity is opposite of chess in every way, it requires dumb AI to work

    sorry, if you didnt get it till now its opposite of what you think it is, its pointless, by now i think youre just intentionally playing ....

    So if i play lets say vanilla WoW in team with rogues(soldiers) only,without tanks or healers ,it needs then super AI to work,therefore WoW is better than GW2,well i kinda agree with that.

    You dont seem understand that either,that when theres trinity you can play in many ways,healer team only,tank team only,mixed,whatever.

    its also something that you cant do when theres soldier only in table.

     

    You see, every post you make makes less and less sense.

  • stevebombsquadstevebombsquad Member UncommonPosts: 884
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
    Originally posted by PAL-18

    GW2 ?

    Tank / threat mechanic is imaginary only to you it seems.

    in chess we use it in many ways,we act like we are threatening someone and actualyl we are not because its part of the plan,we do it because that way we make opponent play as the way we want or atleast we hope so.

    in MMO holy trinity we do same kind of things,lets say healer is in danger,therefore we sacrifice soldier to take aggro and kite him,therefore our healer can play the way we want to but opponent does not want to.

    millions of possibilites,but obsolete in your GW2 because everybody is soldier.

     

    I'd love to play chess against you. Seems to me you confuse chess and poker...

    Acutally the "we make (sic) opponent play as we want" is kind of true. Chess all boils down to checks, captures, blocks and threats. By using these mechanics, you force your opponent into making moves that assist with your overall goal. I am not saying that chess is like the trinity, only that the one statement holds some truth.

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

  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    Originally posted by stevebombsquad
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
    Originally posted by PAL-18

    GW2 ?

    Tank / threat mechanic is imaginary only to you it seems.

    in chess we use it in many ways,we act like we are threatening someone and actualyl we are not because its part of the plan,we do it because that way we make opponent play as the way we want or atleast we hope so.

    in MMO holy trinity we do same kind of things,lets say healer is in danger,therefore we sacrifice soldier to take aggro and kite him,therefore our healer can play the way we want to but opponent does not want to.

    millions of possibilites,but obsolete in your GW2 because everybody is soldier.

     

    I'd love to play chess against you. Seems to me you confuse chess and poker...

    Acutally the "we make (sic) opponent play as we want" is kind of true. Chess all boils down to checks, captures, blocks and threats. By using these mechanics, you force your opponent into making moves that assist with your overall goal. I am not saying that chess is like the trinity, only that the one statement holds some truth.

    You cannot force you opponent to play like you want it in chess, THATS the main difference between trinity and not trinity. THATS why trinity doesnt work in PvP. Thats why everyone will run pass the tank and proceed to kill the healer no matter how much yo want then not to. Along with non one dimensional pieces that can JUST block, JUST capture or JUST support because any piece can do any of those things at any time.

  • PAL-18PAL-18 Member UncommonPosts: 844
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by stevebombsquad
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
    Originally posted by PAL-18

    GW2 ?

    Tank / threat mechanic is imaginary only to you it seems.

    in chess we use it in many ways,we act like we are threatening someone and actualyl we are not because its part of the plan,we do it because that way we make opponent play as the way we want or atleast we hope so.

    in MMO holy trinity we do same kind of things,lets say healer is in danger,therefore we sacrifice soldier to take aggro and kite him,therefore our healer can play the way we want to but opponent does not want to.

    millions of possibilites,but obsolete in your GW2 because everybody is soldier.

     

    I'd love to play chess against you. Seems to me you confuse chess and poker...

    Acutally the "we make (sic) opponent play as we want" is kind of true. Chess all boils down to checks, captures, blocks and threats. By using these mechanics, you force your opponent into making moves that assist with your overall goal. I am not saying that chess is like the trinity, only that the one statement holds some truth.

    You cannot force you opponent to play like you want it in chess, THATS the main difference between trinity and not trinity. THATS why trinity doesnt work in PvP. Thats why everyone will run pass the tank and proceed to kill the healer no matter how much yo want then not to. Along with non one dimensional pieces that can JUST block, JUST capture or JUST support because any piece can do any of those things at any time.

    Tells a lot about you.

    Anyways i see how you play,run past something to hit something without understanding at all what else there is (can be in your case) in games.

    Ever heard of buffs for example ?

    Lesson 1.  Tanks buffing health,armor,reflects absorbs whatever etc. means nothing?

     

     

    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/ **

  • PAL-18PAL-18 Member UncommonPosts: 844
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by stevebombsquad
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
    Originally posted by PAL-18

    GW2 ?

    Tank / threat mechanic is imaginary only to you it seems.

    in chess we use it in many ways,we act like we are threatening someone and actualyl we are not because its part of the plan,we do it because that way we make opponent play as the way we want or atleast we hope so.

    in MMO holy trinity we do same kind of things,lets say healer is in danger,therefore we sacrifice soldier to take aggro and kite him,therefore our healer can play the way we want to but opponent does not want to.

    millions of possibilites,but obsolete in your GW2 because everybody is soldier.

     

    I'd love to play chess against you. Seems to me you confuse chess and poker...

    Acutally the "we make (sic) opponent play as we want" is kind of true. Chess all boils down to checks, captures, blocks and threats. By using these mechanics, you force your opponent into making moves that assist with your overall goal. I am not saying that chess is like the trinity, only that the one statement holds some truth.

    You cannot force you opponent to play like you want it in chess, THATS the main difference between trinity and not trinity. THATS why trinity doesnt work in PvP. Thats why everyone will run pass the tank and proceed to kill the healer no matter how much yo want then not to. Along with non one dimensional pieces that can JUST block, JUST capture or JUST support because any piece can do any of those things at any time.

    Tells a lot about you.

    Anyways i see how you play,run past something to hit something without understanding at all what else there is (can be in your case) in games.

    Ever heard of buffs for example ?

    Lesson 1.  Tanks buffing health,armor,reflects absorbs whatever etc. means nothing?

    And how is that related to the discussion at hand, and to chess?

    Chess lesson 1. Chess is not a (mmo)RPG, and you can't buff your king.

    You are learning.

    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/ **

  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
    Originally posted by PAL-18
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by stevebombsquad
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
    Originally posted by PAL-18

    GW2 ?

    Tank / threat mechanic is imaginary only to you it seems.

    in chess we use it in many ways,we act like we are threatening someone and actualyl we are not because its part of the plan,we do it because that way we make opponent play as the way we want or atleast we hope so.

    in MMO holy trinity we do same kind of things,lets say healer is in danger,therefore we sacrifice soldier to take aggro and kite him,therefore our healer can play the way we want to but opponent does not want to.

    millions of possibilites,but obsolete in your GW2 because everybody is soldier.

     

    I'd love to play chess against you. Seems to me you confuse chess and poker...

    Acutally the "we make (sic) opponent play as we want" is kind of true. Chess all boils down to checks, captures, blocks and threats. By using these mechanics, you force your opponent into making moves that assist with your overall goal. I am not saying that chess is like the trinity, only that the one statement holds some truth.

    You cannot force you opponent to play like you want it in chess, THATS the main difference between trinity and not trinity. THATS why trinity doesnt work in PvP. Thats why everyone will run pass the tank and proceed to kill the healer no matter how much yo want then not to. Along with non one dimensional pieces that can JUST block, JUST capture or JUST support because any piece can do any of those things at any time.

    Tells a lot about you.

    Anyways i see how you play,run past something to hit something without understanding at all what else there is (can be in your case) in games.

    Ever heard of buffs for example ?

    Lesson 1.  Tanks buffing health,armor,reflects absorbs whatever etc. means nothing?

    And how is that related to the discussion at hand, and to chess?

    Chess lesson 1. Chess is not a (mmo)RPG, and you can't buff your king.

    You are learning.

    Yeah, I'm learning that you will never admit to be wrong, indeed, and that I should stop wasting my time arguing with you.

    Yup, hes just intentionally playing ..... no need to drag down discussion with such nonsense.

  • cheyanecheyane Member LegendaryPosts: 8,658
    Not quite true to say in PvP the PvP player is going to ignore the tank and go for the healer. In Warhammer the tanks had a way of making the opponent player in PvP to focus on them it was a taunt that worked in PvP. Also in games where there is collision detection you can bottleneck an area with tanks and keep the healers away from the PvP players that go for them.
    Chamber of Chains
  • Loke666Loke666 Member EpicPosts: 21,441
    Originally posted by PAL-18

    GW2 ?

    Tank / threat mechanic is imaginary only to you it seems.

    in chess we use it in many ways,we act like we are threatening someone and actualyl we are not because its part of the plan,we do it because that way we make opponent play as the way we want or atleast we hope so.

    in MMO holy trinity we do same kind of things,lets say healer is in danger,therefore we sacrifice soldier to take aggro and kite him,therefore our healer can play the way we want to but opponent does not want to.

    millions of possibilites,but obsolete in your GW2 because everybody is soldier.

    Everybody in GW2 is a soldier, yeah but not at the same time. The idea is that you switch between the roles. You ele will switch to healing or buffing when needed to and will DPS most of the rest of the time.

    The problem with GW2 is that it was nerfed just before launch, a lot of people were whining about the difficulty, and the dungeons have been nerfed against since then. That made most of the content so easy that you actually can complete it without understanding how grouping should work.

    The difference between GW2 and trinity games is no taunts and that you change between the roles when needed. The difficulty do have affected GW2 badly but a lot of trinity games todays are so easy that most of it's content could be completed with just DPS, the difference is that players are used to have the trinity runs and doing something right makes it easier. In GW2 a large percentage of the players don't get the group dynamics. Something more and more common in trinity MMOs as well as players nowadays solo up to max level.

    And BTW: cut away some of the quotes, please. Reading what the 10 guys before you said might be interesting but I can go back if I need to do that, the thread gets very hard to read when you get 5 posts a page because you fill the posts with quotes. Just keep the one you are replying to unless you need the one above as well to make your point.

  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    Originally posted by cheyane
    Not quite true to say in PvP the PvP player is going to ignore the tank and go for the healer. In Warhammer the tanks had a way of making the opponent player in PvP to focus on them it was a taunt that worked in PvP. Also in games where there is collision detection you can bottleneck an area with tanks and keep the healers away from the PvP players that go for them.

    1. Threat/taunt tanking never worked in PvP

    2. Why shouldnt i just switch to ranged and attack healer and ignore the tank?

  • Loke666Loke666 Member EpicPosts: 21,441
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by cheyane
    Not quite true to say in PvP the PvP player is going to ignore the tank and go for the healer. In Warhammer the tanks had a way of making the opponent player in PvP to focus on them it was a taunt that worked in PvP. Also in games where there is collision detection you can bottleneck an area with tanks and keep the healers away from the PvP players that go for them.

    1. Threat/taunt tanking never worked in PvP

    2. Why shouldnt i just switch to ranged and attack healer and ignore the tank?

    It's not that it doesn't work, it is just that devs don't make the games that way. They could easily lock your target on an opponent with an skill but most players seems to think that is fine against monsters but not against themselves.

    Heck, you could make a game where the monsters tanks the players instead of the other way around as well.

    There is however an actual good reason that you don't ignore someone who is meleeing you to pull a ranged weapon and going for another target: In a real battle you would be killed in a second. Most pen and paper roleplaying games have something called "attack of opportunity" which means that someone engaging you would get an opening which they would use.

    Also, disengaging an opponent is risky.

    While that might sounds like I am in favor of tanking I think taunts is just bad mechanics, body blocking is another matter and so is engaging an opponent to force him to focus on you.

    The problem with the trinity as some already pointed out is that a game who uses it have a different system for PvP which makes the game pretty unbalanced. A good game needs a single kind of group mechanics so trinity works best in games who doesn't have PvP while it is crap in PvP focused games.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,775
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard
     

    And how is that related to the discussion at hand, and to chess?

    Chess lesson 1. Chess is not a (mmo)RPG, and you can't buff your king.

    You can buff your pawn if it reaches the end row.

  • MalviousMalvious Member UncommonPosts: 218
    Tank / Heale / Dps / Support

    Fine, we'll compromise. I'll get my way & you'll find a way to be okay with that.

  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    Originally posted by Loke666
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by cheyane
    Not quite true to say in PvP the PvP player is going to ignore the tank and go for the healer. In Warhammer the tanks had a way of making the opponent player in PvP to focus on them it was a taunt that worked in PvP. Also in games where there is collision detection you can bottleneck an area with tanks and keep the healers away from the PvP players that go for them.

    1. Threat/taunt tanking never worked in PvP

    2. Why shouldnt i just switch to ranged and attack healer and ignore the tank?

    It's not that it doesn't work, it is just that devs don't make the games that way. They could easily lock your target on an opponent with an skill but most players seems to think that is fine against monsters but not against themselves.

    Heck, you could make a game where the monsters tanks the players instead of the other way around as well.

    There is however an actual good reason that you don't ignore someone who is meleeing you to pull a ranged weapon and going for another target: In a real battle you would be killed in a second. Most pen and paper roleplaying games have something called "attack of opportunity" which means that someone engaging you would get an opening which they would use.

    Also, disengaging an opponent is risky.

    While that might sounds like I am in favor of tanking I think taunts is just bad mechanics, body blocking is another matter and so is engaging an opponent to force him to focus on you.

    The problem with the trinity as some already pointed out is that a game who uses it have a different system for PvP which makes the game pretty unbalanced. A good game needs a single kind of group mechanics so trinity works best in games who doesn't have PvP while it is crap in PvP focused games.

    Thats the point, it doesnt make sense to do it that way. For PvP or PvE. people like it because its simplistic and they dont need to do another layer of thought which role to do at what time because game told them "thou art healer and thou shall heal"

    The thing is, even with AoOs and disengaging penalties i might still pull out ranged at tany point IF i asses its best thing to do at ANY time, theres no magic force that compells me not doing, and that assesment will most likely not be connected to tank itself, ESPECIALLY so if healer is weakling that dies in 2 shots (which it has to be or you have tank AND healer in one package at which point just tank becomes redundant)

    And thats a given, trinty is poor in PvP, it requires dumb AI to work and, unless you play against bads which are equvivalent of dumb AI) its pontless.

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Member RarePosts: 14,247
    ...

    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

Sign In or Register to comment.