Originally posted by Ilvaldyr In fact, imagine your 5 man group is comprised of 5 x Han Solo clones; wearing leather jackets and wielding blaster pistols. How would they kill a krayt dragon?
Why the hell would Han Solo (five of them no less) be fighting a Krayt dragon in the first place?
If the bulk of this game's content involves playing "park ranger" to a bunch of ill-tempered animals out in the woods, I'm gonna be pissed.
The thing that really, REALLY bugs me about "the holy trinity" is how hard it makes it to form groups and keep groups going. When you have defined roles, you HAVE to have X amount of Y roles. You could have 4 real life friends online and ready to play, but if one isn't playing a tank, one isn't playing a healer, and 3 aren't dps, than you can't run something together. It also makes it really hard to find a group. "Hey look there are 4 people in a group that need 1 more... oh shoot I'm not the role they need". It's stupid, frustrating, and wastes time. Developers need to find a way to allow anyone, no matter their role, to play in a group together, and the outcome be dependent on how they played, not what their role was.
For once, Abrahmm, we're in total agreement on something.
Mankind have fought for thousands of years without the "holy trinity MMO solution". And Han Solo is a character, not a class. We're not discussing the evolution of warfare; we're talking about group-based combat in MMOs. I used Han Solo as an example of a non-combat, non-healer character. But the disturbing matter in your post is that you sound to fear an alternative. You make it sound as there are no way of killing a kryat dragon with five soldiers alone. And a soldier is a "tank" and dps" in the same person. If you read my posts on this topic; you'll see a general trend.. sure, I acknowledge that it -could- be done but not in a manner that I would consider both fun and challenging (to all group members). 5 soldiers -could- be able to kill a Krayt dragon by just blasting it with long-range weapons; but where's the challenge and skill factor in merely pressing "shoot" .. ? What you need to consider is personal skill and tactics......not some holy MMO trinity. Not two persons are the same. If you have ten groups of five soldiers, every group will solve the dragon in a own way. No, every group will solve the dragon kill in a manner permitted by the games mechanics. Remember, we're not talking theoretical combat in a real-world setting; we're talking MMOs. If the dragon can be killed by 5 players pressing "shoot" then that's what they will do.
And Aremess, most of my response to you is mirrored by singsofdeath's post above; there are a lot of factors that make tanking more difficult than just "press Taunt", and likewise it's never sufficient for a healer to just "press Heal Tank".
For an example of some of the variety involved, read some of the tactics for fighting raid bosses in WoW. Some methods take MONTHS for a skilled raid to properly master.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
The thing that really, REALLY bugs me about "the holy trinity" is how hard it makes it to form groups and keep groups going. When you have defined roles, you HAVE to have X amount of Y roles. You could have 4 real life friends online and ready to play, but if one isn't playing a tank, one isn't playing a healer, and 3 aren't dps, than you can't run something together. It also makes it really hard to find a group. "Hey look there are 4 people in a group that need 1 more... oh shoot I'm not the role they need". It's stupid, frustrating, and wastes time. Developers need to find a way to allow anyone, no matter their role, to play in a group together, and the outcome be dependent on how they played, not what their role was.
I agree with you on this; which is why I'm in favour of hybridization in class based MMO's.
To my mind, every class should be able to fulfil at least two of the three elements of the trinity.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
The thing that really, REALLY bugs me about "the holy trinity" is how hard it makes it to form groups and keep groups going. When you have defined roles, you HAVE to have X amount of Y roles. You could have 4 real life friends online and ready to play, but if one isn't playing a tank, one isn't playing a healer, and 3 aren't dps, than you can't run something together. It also makes it really hard to find a group. "Hey look there are 4 people in a group that need 1 more... oh shoot I'm not the role they need". It's stupid, frustrating, and wastes time. Developers need to find a way to allow anyone, no matter their role, to play in a group together, and the outcome be dependent on how they played, not what their role was.
For once, Abrahmm, we're in total agreement on something.
Yay! We have finally found common ground!
Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic Played: SWG, Guild Wars, WoW Playing: Eve Online, Counter-strike Loved: Star Wars Galaxies Waiting for: Earthrise, Guild Wars 2, anything sandbox.
The thing that really, REALLY bugs me about "the holy trinity" is how hard it makes it to form groups and keep groups going. When you have defined roles, you HAVE to have X amount of Y roles. You could have 4 real life friends online and ready to play, but if one isn't playing a tank, one isn't playing a healer, and 3 aren't dps, than you can't run something together. It also makes it really hard to find a group. "Hey look there are 4 people in a group that need 1 more... oh shoot I'm not the role they need". It's stupid, frustrating, and wastes time. Developers need to find a way to allow anyone, no matter their role, to play in a group together, and the outcome be dependent on how they played, not what their role was.
The thing is I want to bring something fun, interesting, and NEEDED to my group that my friends do not have that makes us a part of the puzzle. I am sure some would like a game like you speak of but myself I love the roles in these games and how they come together to make a powerful unity to kill big monsters.
Without those distinctions, for me it would not be fun. I already find they are doing this to some degree today and it lessens my fun. I would prefer the roles be very defined and you need one of everything to successfully complete a group. That is in my perfect world. : P I know this isn't going to happen but I can dream. I dislike how we have different ways in games now to change ones role, or the roles have become some blended it is hard to have that distinct job in the party any longer. Everyone does a little of everything. I like different, I don't want to be a clone.
Originally posted by Ilvaldyr I used Han Solo as an example of a non-combat, non-healer character.
How is he an example of either? Did you watch the movies??
As for the topic on hand, I don't mind so much players electing to play "traditional" roles (tank, nuke, healer) of their own volition, I just hope it's not hard-coded into the game's mechanics.
Take City of Heroes for example. That game does have semi-traditional archetypes, yet the "holy trinity" is by no means necessary for success in group play. In fact, an eight-man team of "healers" can be one of the most devastating compositions in the whole game.
Well...that would hold true if most fights were actually -just- what you describe. Called "Tank'n'Spank", these fights are indeed, the easiest thing you could possibly have. Fully agree with you there.
As soon as you add other elements to it though, it gets different, no? Like, adding random spawns that need to be kited. Like adding special abilities to the mob that require you to employ differing tactics. Maybe make the mob taunt resisting so that damage and threat has to be cautiously applied. Maybe make it necessary for the entire fight to be on the run. Maybe have adds spawn that need to be trapped and CCed. Another example is having to mind-control adds in order to "tank" the mob because any player would not be able to take the damage. All examples of already existing "tactics" in games.
There's possibilities of complexity, even -IF- you have the holy trinity that you seem to ignore.
Added spawn abilities, more varied responses, “schticks” of any various flavor are great (imo) exactly because they make combat interesting. They turn off the auto-attacks and the macros and make people actually play the game, react to what’s happening around them and not just mash a single button for an hour.
I love content like that with the caveats that it’s 1) extremely rare and 2) ultimately, predictable. Raid content *is* fun.. the first time. Maybe even the second time. But the 3rd? The 5th? The 10th? Not so much.
And Raid content is still being approached as Tank and Spank. It’s the basis of the games and how they are being designed that’s the issue. If there’s a “tank” class.. then of course people are going to tank with it. The point is there shouldn’t be a tank class, it’s unnecessary. And there certainly shouldn’t be an instant healer class in a Star Wars game.
Archetypes do not fit the Star Wars cannon. Show me a battle where one individual held the entire room’s attention, and suffered the entire room’s attacks while others stood by unharmed and blasted away at the opposition.
It’s silly.
EVERY Star Wars character is capable and competent and able to take care of themselves in a fight. Heck R2D2 kicks butt on occasion lol
Again, the conversation is about how “the holy trinity” is necessary and can’t be done without. Which is preposterous, of course it can (and should imo) be eliminated.
It would be interesting to have mobs always react differently and employ different tactics so a group would have to think on their feet to adapt. Sadly, I don't think AI is quite ready for that.
See, even what you describe as alternatives would result in the same thing as what you complain about. A boss would be found, players would look for a tactic to beat it, that tactic would be published, others would copy it and boom...no one has to think anymore.
As for new/unpredictable reactions in enemies? YES! I’d love to see that, though I’d agree that it’s unlikely (darnit)
But on the topic of same old same old? No I disagree, simply because the “no one has to think anymore” line is hyperbole. In a drag and bag people *have* to think, it’s the nature of the tactic that you have to be aware of what’s going on around you. If you’re situational awareness gets sloppy, then you get eaten by the baddie with big sharp teeth. That’s the point of reactive tactics. If you stop thinking, you get an all-expenses paid trip to the nearest rez-point.
Tank and Spank is unconscious. Heck it’s LITERALLY a macro button press. That’s my point and the original conversation started around the idea that games coldn’t possibly exist without it. That life as we know it might end without the holy trinity to guide our every action.
Codswallop sez I
*Ooops I color coded the replies backwards. Red is what I'm replying to hehehe
Originally posted by Ilvaldyr I used Han Solo as an example of a non-combat, non-healer character.
How is he an example of either? Did you watch the movies??
As for the topic on hand, I don't mind so much players electing to play "traditional" roles (tank, nuke, healer) of their own volition, I just hope it's not hard-coded into the game's mechanics.
Take City of Heroes for example. That game does have semi-traditional archetypes, yet the "holy trinity" is by no means necessary for success in group play. In fact, an eight-man team of "healers" can be one of the most devastating compositions in the whole game.
Mea culpa .. that was my typo.. I meant non-tank, non-healer.
And I do agree with you classes shouldn't be hard-coded to specific archetypes. It's why I play a druid in WoW; I like the variety of being able to choose what "role" I want to be today.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
Added spawn abilities, more varied responses, “schticks” of any various flavor are great (imo) exactly because they make combat interesting. They turn off the auto-attacks and the macros and make people actually play the game, react to what’s happening around them and not just mash a single button for an hour.
I love content like that with the caveats that it’s 1) extremely rare and 2) ultimately, predictable. Raid content *is* fun.. the first time. Maybe even the second time. But the 3rd? The 5th? The 10th? Not so much.
And Raid content is still being approached as Tank and Spank. It’s the basis of the games and how they are being designed that’s the issue. If there’s a “tank” class.. then of course people are going to tank with it. The point is there shouldn’t be a tank class, it’s unnecessary. And there certainly shouldn’t be an instant healer class in a Star Wars game.
Archetypes do not fit the Star Wars cannon. Show me a battle where one individual held the entire room’s attention, and suffered the entire room’s attacks while others stood by unharmed and blasted away at the opposition.
It’s silly.
EVERY Star Wars character is capable and competent and able to take care of themselves in a fight. Heck R2D2 kicks butt on occasion lol Again, the conversation is about how “the holy trinity” is necessary and can’t be done without. Which is preposterous, of course it can (and should imo) be eliminated.
Well, as was said before, you can have all the variety you asked for in a game -with- the holy trinity. I don't know how it would be done without, though I am sure there are ways. So, yeah, I think it could be done, I'm just not sure it has to be done, because I don't think there would be so much of a difference. However what I would love would be for players to be more flexible in fulfilling roles. As I pointed out earlier, it would make grouping easier and it would make your gaming experience more different. You could be whatever you feel like being at the time and experience encounters from many differing perspectives (without the need to grind yet another character up).
As for new/unpredictable reactions in enemies? YES! I’d love to see that, though I’d agree that it’s unlikely (darnit)
But on the topic of same old same old? No I disagree, simply because the “no one has to think anymore” line is hyperbole. In a drag and bag people *have* to think, it’s the nature of the tactic that you have to be aware of what’s going on around you. If you’re situational awareness gets sloppy, then you get eaten by the baddie with big sharp teeth. That’s the point of reactive tactics. If you stop thinking, you get an all-expenses paid trip to the nearest rez-point.
Tank and Spank is unconscious. Heck it’s LITERALLY a macro button press. That’s my point and the original conversation started around the idea that games coldn’t possibly exist without it. That life as we know it might end without the holy trinity to guide our every action.
Codswallop sez I
As I said, it depends on how you implement the fight. Let me use an example: In one fight, you need to employ "situational awareness", "crowd-control", "DPS", "Tanking" and "Healing". The boss will attack the tank, but at a certain time, he will use an AoE attack that does ridiculous DPS (more or less unhealable) so, the Tank has to kite the mob (since the mob at the time is moving slower) around the edge of the room, keeping him away from the rest of the group. At another certain time, two adds will spawn, which need to be taken care off by another tank, dragged away from the boss and mowed down quickly, forcing people to be aware of the highest threat. And at -ANOTHER- time, the boss will spawn small adds from the corpse of the former adds, which run around real fast and attack the casters/healers, which need to be CCed and AoE'd down quickly as well. Added to that, the boss has a random direction attack which will toss anyone not paying attention high into the air, at best taking his abilities to contribute out for a bit, at worst, killing him with the damage.
So, you see, the fight is much more complex than simple tank and spank.
But I also agree that these things get repetetive after a while, because you know how to do the fight, you just have to learn how to do it and stay alert. But as I said, that's exactly the same thing that would happen in your examples. The tactic would be learned and then it is all about the players doing their part.
I don#t know a way around that except making encounters more unpredictable and more random.
*Ooops I color coded the replies backwads. Red is what I'm replying too hehehe
As to the point of this thread. No, I don#t think games "NEED" the holy trinity. I just have not come up with a way that would exclude the holy trinity that is much more challenging and fun than what is already implemented. As I said, variety makes challenge. Make an encounter unpredictable and that would force people to really think and adapt, beyond the being aware of what they have to do at a given point.
I dont like the holy trinity at all. It totally ruined playing for me in some games (most). I almost puke when i hear someone saying 'need DPS for Badass Dungeon',
Takes the fun out of mmo's imo. Completely ruins RP as well.
Originally posted by Ilvaldyr I used Han Solo as an example of a non-combat, non-healer character.
How is he an example of either? Did you watch the movies??
As for the topic on hand, I don't mind so much players electing to play "traditional" roles (tank, nuke, healer) of their own volition, I just hope it's not hard-coded into the game's mechanics.
Take City of Heroes for example. That game does have semi-traditional archetypes, yet the "holy trinity" is by no means necessary for success in group play. In fact, an eight-man team of "healers" can be one of the most devastating compositions in the whole game.
Mea culpa .. that was my typo.. I meant non-tank, non-healer.
And I do agree with you classes shouldn't be hard-coded to specific archetypes. It's why I play a druid in WoW; I like the variety of being able to choose what "role" I want to be today.
Hehe, well glad to see we have some common ground too.
But just to settle my inner Star Wars nerd, one could make the argument that Han did play "healer" to Luke in Empire Strikes Back. (He also taunted Stormtroopers in A New Hope.)
Originally posted by Ilvaldyr I used Han Solo as an example of a non-combat, non-healer character.
How is he an example of either? Did you watch the movies??
As for the topic on hand, I don't mind so much players electing to play "traditional" roles (tank, nuke, healer) of their own volition, I just hope it's not hard-coded into the game's mechanics.
Take City of Heroes for example. That game does have semi-traditional archetypes, yet the "holy trinity" is by no means necessary for success in group play. In fact, an eight-man team of "healers" can be one of the most devastating compositions in the whole game.
Mea culpa .. that was my typo.. I meant non-tank, non-healer.
And I do agree with you classes shouldn't be hard-coded to specific archetypes. It's why I play a druid in WoW; I like the variety of being able to choose what "role" I want to be today.
Hehe, well glad to see we have some common ground too.
But just to settle my inner Star Wars nerd, one could make the argument that Han did play "healer" to Luke in Empire Strikes Back. (He also taunted Stormtroopers in A New Hope.)
He failed his taunt/intimidate roll badly though when he finally chased them into a corner (or, in the special edition, intotheir buddies) XD. Loved that scene!
if you wanna talk about what a healer would be according to lore there are few things to which it applies.
normally a healer is a droid doing implants and such fourth, supervising bacta tanks etc..
then theres the Doc that sits in a lab all day over seeing the droids for the most part (not fixing em) but assisting em with diagnosis and seeing they carry out programmed operations to treat the said diagnosis.
then theres the common soldier on the field of batter witha stim implant, a quick rejuv type injector that doesn't necessarily heal, but lessons the severity of the wound, depending on the wound. no specific soldier carried a sort. and anyone could administer it.
then theres the jedi healer, who is the only real heal on the spot during a battle, these jedi were commonly known to be weaker in other force aspects and lightsaber duels.
out of these 4, i can only see the jedi healer and the stim taking part.
its pretty clear that only 8 class's, there is gonna be ALOT of limitations to the game. unlike SWG, where you could be a doc and a weaponsmith.
regardless to say, it appears versatility is going out the window, and our characters will likely be stricken to a paper rock scissors pvp role.
The Healer/Tank/DPS setup is known as the MMO Holy Trinity and has endured for a reason; because it works well and there are no real alternatives to group-vs-boss PVE gameplay. I suppose you could possibly do away with "bosses" that need to be tanked and have all fights be group-vs-group; i.e. instead of having 1 "boss" Dark Jedi to kill, you have a squad of 20 Stormtroopers; I know I wouldn't fancy trying to keep alive a half-dozen ballistic DPSmonkeys There have been games out there that have designed "combat healers" that heal passively as they fight, reducing the "healbot" effect to virtual non-existance. I wouldn't get your hopes up though; the Holy Trinity is still the preferred method for PVE gaming and is almost certainly going to represented in TOR somehow. For my part, I hope they make the "tanking" focus on avoidance rather than mitigation; I really detest the thought of stabbing "a boss" through the chest with a lightsaber and them only losing 1% of their life. Sadly, immersion often has to sacrificed for the sake of basic gameplay sometimes.
What he says. I too dont see a real alternative. I mean, what other setup for spezialized roles can you thnk of? The only alternative would be that everyone can do everything, and then you have all soloers heaven. People cant cooperate when they have no fixed roles. One can hope however that they make the classes interesting and with variations and not too cookie cutter.
It's just a matter of logic deduction. Tanking, healing and DPS just ARE the logical functions of a combat system. Sure you can distribute them different, you can make hybrids - at the price that EVERY hybrid is weaker than the specialist. Why do you think our modern civilization has become an all specialist world? Because specialization is way more productive. Otherwise we would still live in the generalist work age as 2000 years ago. You can remove one class, like healer and put it all to potions, but then you just took away one class some people like to play and place the function on an object instead of the person, and I rather walk with a PERSON who heals me than a potion spammage.
No, my friends, specialized classes are the best for a reason, they are the logical breakdown of the combat functions. If you think you can deduct that better, than give me an example.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Originally posted by Elikal ...The only alternative would be that everyone can do everything, and then you have all soloers heaven. People cant cooperate when they have no fixed roles.
Absolute fallacy.
I'm currently playing one of the most solo-friendly MMOs on the market, City of Heroes. Literally, any build can solo from the tutorial to the level cap. Yet still, I dare say the better part of the community as a whole plays in groups. Why? Because it's more fun. Isn't that the whole point?
Originally posted by Elikal ...you can make hybrids - at the price that EVERY hybrid is weaker than the specialist.
1 + 3 = 2 + 2
What's the difference?
As for the logical breakdown of combat functions, let me a paint a scenario for you:
You see three shadowy figures approaching. The first is a large Gamorrean, covered from head-to-toe in thick body armor, and carrying a hatchet. The second is a frail looking Bothan brandishing a very large rifle. The third is an unarmed medical droid. I hand you a blaster and tell you these three are coming to rob and kill you.
Well, as was said before, you can have all the variety you asked for in a game -with- the holy trinity. I don't know how it would be done without, though I am sure there are ways. So, yeah, I think it could be done, I'm just not sure it has to be done, because I don't think there would be so much of a difference. I find myself forced to disagree. In a holy trinity game archetypes do *one* thing. And they do it almost exclusively. As a player you have *one* role which you can accomplish and that’s all. No one but the healer is going to be able to heal. No one but the Soldier is going to be able to wear heavy armor and tank etc etc. Irregardles of whether "healing" is just a skill (i.e.: not magic or innate power) or wearing heavy armor is simply a matter of being strong enough to carry it and humanoid enough to fit into it.
And the gameplay suffers as a result because your “soldier” can’t do enough damage to take on heavy challenges no matter how resilient he/she is, and your healer can’t do enough damage or be survivable enough and your DPSer can dish it out but is toast as soon as they start taking hits.
It’s a system of interdependence by design. They build it that way so that every adventure *NEEDS* a formulaic composition. Essentially they force you team up, they remove your choice of whether you’d *like* to team and with whom you’d like to team and create a paradigm of false necessity that demands that you take on helpers to complete your puzzle.
How many times have you heard: “Need a healer!!!1111” broadcast? How many times: “One more tank and we’re g2g!”
Players don’t even consider going on certain missions without a proper loadout of archetypes. Not *players* mind you, not *characters*.. ARCHETYPES. You are not Han Solo in an archetypal system, you are a smuggler. You have no identity beyond your baseline statistical capabilities, or rather what people *expect* your baseline statistical capabilities to be.
“What do you mean you don’t heal?!?! YOU’RE A DEFENDER!!!!” Utterly oblivious to the notion that an archetype might try to work outside the box. Let me ask you this. Would Princess Leah and Padme be helpless in a firefight despite their "non-tank" labels? That notion has been disproven in the cannon already.
Archetypes simplify the games to Lincoln logs. This piece fits with that piece and does this. This piece doesn’t work at all unless that piece is also part of the puzzle. The mere fact that several posters have come in here now and literally said that they don’t even know (or can’t imagine) how an AT’less system would even work is proof of the fact that we’ve been trained into believing this spoon-fed system is the only way. It is not. If the basic game design is built around the notion of an AT’less system then the point is that you can team with *ANYONE* and get the job done. The aforementioned 5 Han Solos scenario is perfectly legitimate in an AT’less system. And would be just as viable as 5 Soldiers, or 5 Jedi or 5 Princesses or Gungans or whatever. The point is that 5 Han Solos will fight the spawn differently than 5 Luke Skywalkers, and each encountered mob will be different with each character loadout because individuality will demand it.
You lose the tank and spank by rote simply because everytime you play you’ll probably have a wildly different collection of individuals rather than a purpose built Lincoln log to fit into a specific role. Without the baseline modifications and built in limitations that pigeon hole archetypes into 1 job and 1 job only you have much greater flexibility on an individual basis. Each “character” becomes capable of doing more than one thing.
Sure you may still see some specialists, and they will be better at their chosen focus than someone else, but they won’t be SO much better at it as to preclude someone else doing the job in a pinch.
Tank and Spank exists only because of the ludicrous and proposterous notion of "taunt" A magical power of mass mind control that says "ignore the real threat and waste your time attacking the most invulnerable character instead!" Take away taunt, and you've got a collection of individuals each taking their share of the room's agro and dealing with it in their own way.
However what I would love would be for players to be more flexible in fulfilling roles. As I pointed out earlier, it would make grouping easier and it would make your gaming experience more different. You could be whatever you feel like being at the time and experience encounters from many differing perspectives (without the need to grind yet another character up).
Exactly
As I said, it depends on how you implement the fight. Let me use an example: In one fight, you need to employ "situational awareness", "crowd-control", "DPS", "Tanking" and "Healing". The boss will attack the tank, but at a certain time, he will use an AoE attack that does ridiculous DPS (more or less unhealable) so, the Tank has to kite the mob (since the mob at the time is moving slower) around the edge of the room, keeping him away from the rest of the group. At another certain time, two adds will spawn, which need to be taken care off by another tank, dragged away from the boss and mowed down quickly, forcing people to be aware of the highest threat. And at -ANOTHER- time, the boss will spawn small adds from the corpse of the former adds, which run around real fast and attack the casters/healers, which need to be CCed and AoE'd down quickly as well. Added to that, the boss has a random direction attack which will toss anyone not paying attention high into the air, at best taking his abilities to contribute out for a bit, at worst, killing him with the damage.
So, you see, the fight is much more complex than simple tank and spank.
But I also agree that these things get repetetive after a while, because you know how to do the fight, you just have to learn how to do it and stay alert. But as I said, that's exactly the same thing that would happen in your examples. The tactic would be learned and then it is all about the players doing their part.
I don#t know a way around that except making encounters more unpredictable and more random.
Agreed, content *should* be much more unpredictable. As soon as responses are hard coded they are learned and you can prepare for them BUT Having more generalized (AT’less) characters doesn’t make the aforementioned Raid boss unbeatable. It just means that when you get to that fight there will have to be some teamwork and communication as to what needs to be done. You’ll adapt on the fly, which, for my money is a heckuva lot more exciting than being told “stand here, spam this.”
Archetypes take choice away from players and, while they do provide an easy roadmap (perhaps roadmap isn’t the right word so much as blueprint), they are NOT absolutely required for a successful and enjoyable gaming experience. I believe the player-base has evolved beyond the hand holding need.
Maybe I’m a starry-eyed dreamer in that regard, but I think that we’ve (the MMO crowd) had enough training wheels to be able to ride on our own now.
The problem here is, if you make characters be able to do -everything- then there is -no- interdependency. There is a fine line between making characters universally useful and making them overpowered. Of course, if any character can fulfill any role, you might say that it's basically back to the status quo.
In the end, you will still have the same roles in a fight, only they might be fulfilled by different people. If you displace the tank/healer/dps setup (as in the -classes- are set up to fulfill said role), then all you end up with is a group of character that can do everything and then, before a fight, assigning the roles there.
If you remove the -need- for tanking/healing/dpsing, then you would have to look at a whole new game concept and frankly, I'm not sure where that would lead. You'd end up with the aforementioned mechanics, ccing, kiting, positional awareness etc.....only without the additional need to heal, tank. I think.
But then again, I haven't thought too hard about possible alternatives. I shall meditate on this.
Every player is Force Sensitive thats it... it should be.. then u pick up your power from some skill branches.. and saber skill defense skills... healing skills.. tanking skills... and such...
and you can build up your template with difenret stuff to pick.. but u can only pick a certain ammount of stuff...
and maike it like tons and tons of skill trees....
something like galaxies with a blend of dungeon siege style and such.... or maybe with some guild wars taste...
Originally posted by singsofdeath The problem here is, if you make characters be able to do -everything- then there is -no- interdependency. There is a fine line between making characters universally useful and making them overpowered. Of course, if any character can fulfill any role, you might say that it's basically back to the status quo.
If that were true, then how would you explain a game like Left 4 Dead?
i realize some people may not like skill systems. and although Bioware has spoke saying they are using levels, i still beleive a character's progression will be more like a skill leveling system.
think in terms of Kotor 2. you leveled. but what was a level? the only thing it did was keep track of xp, and at a certain level you obtained a prestige class.
other then that, the entire character progression was skill based. selecting skills and rows of skills to progress through much like the equivalent of a skill based system.
i suspect we will see both in this game. to what degree is the question.
lore wise, a jedi would use blasters, grenades, poison darts and several other weapon types, and were skill with em. Mara Jade is a perfect example. if ever there was a jedi assassin, she would be it.
then theres people throughout the lore, who are not jedi, but were melee equipped in Teras Kasi or bounty hunters who were well known for there melee prowess and there ranged weapons attacks.
there is no such thing as limiting a character to a certain role in star wars. to do so would not be star wars, but some junk game with a coated star wars names/graphics.
Originally posted by singsofdeath The problem here is, if you make characters be able to do -everything- then there is -no- interdependency. There is a fine line between making characters universally useful and making them overpowered. Of course, if any character can fulfill any role, you might say that it's basically back to the status quo.
If that were true, then how would you explain a game like Left 4 Dead?
What's there to explain? Is Left4Dead an MMO? As far as I was aware it's an FPS, isn't it?
I wouldn't want to compare an FPS to MMO. Unless you start talking about games like Darkfall. But as far as we know, TOR won't have twitch combat. Adding twitch combat also adds a whole different dimension to the encounters, a lot changes. I am pretty sure that in twitch combat the "non"-Trinity could be realized better.
Hmmm, gonna have to think about this again.
If you were talking about interdependency, I think I actually explained that wrong in my first post. No interdependency is of course not true, since you would still need more than one person to beat certain scenarios. I was more talking about the interdependency in a fight itself. As in, a damage-soaker can't, at the same time, put out insane DPS, and a DPS can't at the same time heal etc.
Comments
Why the hell would Han Solo (five of them no less) be fighting a Krayt dragon in the first place?
If the bulk of this game's content involves playing "park ranger" to a bunch of ill-tempered animals out in the woods, I'm gonna be pissed.
For once, Abrahmm, we're in total agreement on something.
And Aremess, most of my response to you is mirrored by singsofdeath's post above; there are a lot of factors that make tanking more difficult than just "press Taunt", and likewise it's never sufficient for a healer to just "press Heal Tank".
For an example of some of the variety involved, read some of the tactics for fighting raid bosses in WoW. Some methods take MONTHS for a skilled raid to properly master.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
I agree with you on this; which is why I'm in favour of hybridization in class based MMO's.
To my mind, every class should be able to fulfil at least two of the three elements of the trinity.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
For once, Abrahmm, we're in total agreement on something.
Yay! We have finally found common ground!
Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic
Played: SWG, Guild Wars, WoW
Playing: Eve Online, Counter-strike
Loved: Star Wars Galaxies
Waiting for: Earthrise, Guild Wars 2, anything sandbox.
The thing is I want to bring something fun, interesting, and NEEDED to my group that my friends do not have that makes us a part of the puzzle. I am sure some would like a game like you speak of but myself I love the roles in these games and how they come together to make a powerful unity to kill big monsters.
Without those distinctions, for me it would not be fun. I already find they are doing this to some degree today and it lessens my fun. I would prefer the roles be very defined and you need one of everything to successfully complete a group. That is in my perfect world. : P I know this isn't going to happen but I can dream. I dislike how we have different ways in games now to change ones role, or the roles have become some blended it is hard to have that distinct job in the party any longer. Everyone does a little of everything. I like different, I don't want to be a clone.
How is he an example of either? Did you watch the movies??
As for the topic on hand, I don't mind so much players electing to play "traditional" roles (tank, nuke, healer) of their own volition, I just hope it's not hard-coded into the game's mechanics.
Take City of Heroes for example. That game does have semi-traditional archetypes, yet the "holy trinity" is by no means necessary for success in group play. In fact, an eight-man team of "healers" can be one of the most devastating compositions in the whole game.
Well...that would hold true if most fights were actually -just- what you describe. Called "Tank'n'Spank", these fights are indeed, the easiest thing you could possibly have. Fully agree with you there.
As soon as you add other elements to it though, it gets different, no? Like, adding random spawns that need to be kited. Like adding special abilities to the mob that require you to employ differing tactics. Maybe make the mob taunt resisting so that damage and threat has to be cautiously applied. Maybe make it necessary for the entire fight to be on the run. Maybe have adds spawn that need to be trapped and CCed. Another example is having to mind-control adds in order to "tank" the mob because any player would not be able to take the damage. All examples of already existing "tactics" in games.
There's possibilities of complexity, even -IF- you have the holy trinity that you seem to ignore.
Added spawn abilities, more varied responses, “schticks” of any various flavor are great (imo) exactly because they make combat interesting. They turn off the auto-attacks and the macros and make people actually play the game, react to what’s happening around them and not just mash a single button for an hour.
I love content like that with the caveats that it’s 1) extremely rare and 2) ultimately, predictable. Raid content *is* fun.. the first time. Maybe even the second time. But the 3rd? The 5th? The 10th? Not so much.
And Raid content is still being approached as Tank and Spank. It’s the basis of the games and how they are being designed that’s the issue. If there’s a “tank” class.. then of course people are going to tank with it. The point is there shouldn’t be a tank class, it’s unnecessary. And there certainly shouldn’t be an instant healer class in a Star Wars game.
Archetypes do not fit the Star Wars cannon. Show me a battle where one individual held the entire room’s attention, and suffered the entire room’s attacks while others stood by unharmed and blasted away at the opposition.
It’s silly.
EVERY Star Wars character is capable and competent and able to take care of themselves in a fight. Heck R2D2 kicks butt on occasion lol
Again, the conversation is about how “the holy trinity” is necessary and can’t be done without. Which is preposterous, of course it can (and should imo) be eliminated.
It would be interesting to have mobs always react differently and employ different tactics so a group would have to think on their feet to adapt. Sadly, I don't think AI is quite ready for that.
See, even what you describe as alternatives would result in the same thing as what you complain about. A boss would be found, players would look for a tactic to beat it, that tactic would be published, others would copy it and boom...no one has to think anymore.
As for new/unpredictable reactions in enemies? YES! I’d love to see that, though I’d agree that it’s unlikely (darnit)
But on the topic of same old same old? No I disagree, simply because the “no one has to think anymore” line is hyperbole. In a drag and bag people *have* to think, it’s the nature of the tactic that you have to be aware of what’s going on around you. If you’re situational awareness gets sloppy, then you get eaten by the baddie with big sharp teeth. That’s the point of reactive tactics. If you stop thinking, you get an all-expenses paid trip to the nearest rez-point.
Tank and Spank is unconscious. Heck it’s LITERALLY a macro button press. That’s my point and the original conversation started around the idea that games coldn’t possibly exist without it. That life as we know it might end without the holy trinity to guide our every action.
Codswallop sez I
*Ooops I color coded the replies backwards. Red is what I'm replying to hehehe
How is he an example of either? Did you watch the movies??
As for the topic on hand, I don't mind so much players electing to play "traditional" roles (tank, nuke, healer) of their own volition, I just hope it's not hard-coded into the game's mechanics.
Take City of Heroes for example. That game does have semi-traditional archetypes, yet the "holy trinity" is by no means necessary for success in group play. In fact, an eight-man team of "healers" can be one of the most devastating compositions in the whole game.
Mea culpa .. that was my typo.. I meant non-tank, non-healer.
And I do agree with you classes shouldn't be hard-coded to specific archetypes. It's why I play a druid in WoW; I like the variety of being able to choose what "role" I want to be today.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
As to the point of this thread. No, I don#t think games "NEED" the holy trinity. I just have not come up with a way that would exclude the holy trinity that is much more challenging and fun than what is already implemented. As I said, variety makes challenge. Make an encounter unpredictable and that would force people to really think and adapt, beyond the being aware of what they have to do at a given point.
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
Final Fantasy 7
I dont like the holy trinity at all. It totally ruined playing for me in some games (most). I almost puke when i hear someone saying 'need DPS for Badass Dungeon',
Takes the fun out of mmo's imo. Completely ruins RP as well.
How is he an example of either? Did you watch the movies??
As for the topic on hand, I don't mind so much players electing to play "traditional" roles (tank, nuke, healer) of their own volition, I just hope it's not hard-coded into the game's mechanics.
Take City of Heroes for example. That game does have semi-traditional archetypes, yet the "holy trinity" is by no means necessary for success in group play. In fact, an eight-man team of "healers" can be one of the most devastating compositions in the whole game.
Mea culpa .. that was my typo.. I meant non-tank, non-healer.
And I do agree with you classes shouldn't be hard-coded to specific archetypes. It's why I play a druid in WoW; I like the variety of being able to choose what "role" I want to be today.
Hehe, well glad to see we have some common ground too.
But just to settle my inner Star Wars nerd, one could make the argument that Han did play "healer" to Luke in Empire Strikes Back. (He also taunted Stormtroopers in A New Hope.)
How is he an example of either? Did you watch the movies??
As for the topic on hand, I don't mind so much players electing to play "traditional" roles (tank, nuke, healer) of their own volition, I just hope it's not hard-coded into the game's mechanics.
Take City of Heroes for example. That game does have semi-traditional archetypes, yet the "holy trinity" is by no means necessary for success in group play. In fact, an eight-man team of "healers" can be one of the most devastating compositions in the whole game.
Mea culpa .. that was my typo.. I meant non-tank, non-healer.
And I do agree with you classes shouldn't be hard-coded to specific archetypes. It's why I play a druid in WoW; I like the variety of being able to choose what "role" I want to be today.
Hehe, well glad to see we have some common ground too.
But just to settle my inner Star Wars nerd, one could make the argument that Han did play "healer" to Luke in Empire Strikes Back. (He also taunted Stormtroopers in A New Hope.)
He failed his taunt/intimidate roll badly though when he finally chased them into a corner (or, in the special edition, intotheir buddies) XD. Loved that scene!
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
Final Fantasy 7
if you wanna talk about what a healer would be according to lore there are few things to which it applies.
normally a healer is a droid doing implants and such fourth, supervising bacta tanks etc..
then theres the Doc that sits in a lab all day over seeing the droids for the most part (not fixing em) but assisting em with diagnosis and seeing they carry out programmed operations to treat the said diagnosis.
then theres the common soldier on the field of batter witha stim implant, a quick rejuv type injector that doesn't necessarily heal, but lessons the severity of the wound, depending on the wound. no specific soldier carried a sort. and anyone could administer it.
then theres the jedi healer, who is the only real heal on the spot during a battle, these jedi were commonly known to be weaker in other force aspects and lightsaber duels.
out of these 4, i can only see the jedi healer and the stim taking part.
its pretty clear that only 8 class's, there is gonna be ALOT of limitations to the game. unlike SWG, where you could be a doc and a weaponsmith.
regardless to say, it appears versatility is going out the window, and our characters will likely be stricken to a paper rock scissors pvp role.
Wait, when did they announce there'd only be 8 "class's"?
What he says. I too dont see a real alternative. I mean, what other setup for spezialized roles can you thnk of? The only alternative would be that everyone can do everything, and then you have all soloers heaven. People cant cooperate when they have no fixed roles. One can hope however that they make the classes interesting and with variations and not too cookie cutter.
It's just a matter of logic deduction. Tanking, healing and DPS just ARE the logical functions of a combat system. Sure you can distribute them different, you can make hybrids - at the price that EVERY hybrid is weaker than the specialist. Why do you think our modern civilization has become an all specialist world? Because specialization is way more productive. Otherwise we would still live in the generalist work age as 2000 years ago. You can remove one class, like healer and put it all to potions, but then you just took away one class some people like to play and place the function on an object instead of the person, and I rather walk with a PERSON who heals me than a potion spammage.
No, my friends, specialized classes are the best for a reason, they are the logical breakdown of the combat functions. If you think you can deduct that better, than give me an example.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Absolute fallacy.
I'm currently playing one of the most solo-friendly MMOs on the market, City of Heroes. Literally, any build can solo from the tutorial to the level cap. Yet still, I dare say the better part of the community as a whole plays in groups. Why? Because it's more fun. Isn't that the whole point?
1 + 3 = 2 + 2
What's the difference?
As for the logical breakdown of combat functions, let me a paint a scenario for you:
You see three shadowy figures approaching. The first is a large Gamorrean, covered from head-to-toe in thick body armor, and carrying a hatchet. The second is a frail looking Bothan brandishing a very large rifle. The third is an unarmed medical droid. I hand you a blaster and tell you these three are coming to rob and kill you.
What do you do?
The problem here is, if you make characters be able to do -everything- then there is -no- interdependency. There is a fine line between making characters universally useful and making them overpowered. Of course, if any character can fulfill any role, you might say that it's basically back to the status quo.
In the end, you will still have the same roles in a fight, only they might be fulfilled by different people. If you displace the tank/healer/dps setup (as in the -classes- are set up to fulfill said role), then all you end up with is a group of character that can do everything and then, before a fight, assigning the roles there.
If you remove the -need- for tanking/healing/dpsing, then you would have to look at a whole new game concept and frankly, I'm not sure where that would lead. You'd end up with the aforementioned mechanics, ccing, kiting, positional awareness etc.....only without the additional need to heal, tank. I think.
But then again, I haven't thought too hard about possible alternatives. I shall meditate on this.
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
Final Fantasy 7
Wait, when did they announce there'd only be 8 "class's"?
http://www.edge-online.com/magazine/inside-the-old-republic?page=0,0
page 3.
Every player is Force Sensitive thats it... it should be.. then u pick up your power from some skill branches.. and saber skill defense skills... healing skills.. tanking skills... and such...
and you can build up your template with difenret stuff to pick.. but u can only pick a certain ammount of stuff...
and maike it like tons and tons of skill trees....
something like galaxies with a blend of dungeon siege style and such.... or maybe with some guild wars taste...
If that were true, then how would you explain a game like Left 4 Dead?
i realize some people may not like skill systems. and although Bioware has spoke saying they are using levels, i still beleive a character's progression will be more like a skill leveling system.
think in terms of Kotor 2. you leveled. but what was a level? the only thing it did was keep track of xp, and at a certain level you obtained a prestige class.
other then that, the entire character progression was skill based. selecting skills and rows of skills to progress through much like the equivalent of a skill based system.
i suspect we will see both in this game. to what degree is the question.
lore wise, a jedi would use blasters, grenades, poison darts and several other weapon types, and were skill with em. Mara Jade is a perfect example. if ever there was a jedi assassin, she would be it.
then theres people throughout the lore, who are not jedi, but were melee equipped in Teras Kasi or bounty hunters who were well known for there melee prowess and there ranged weapons attacks.
there is no such thing as limiting a character to a certain role in star wars. to do so would not be star wars, but some junk game with a coated star wars names/graphics.
As will I
Thank you for your input though, it was a pleasure and gave me some to think about as well.
Though the above link and 8 "classes" news is a major disappointment for me personally
Oh well
If that were true, then how would you explain a game like Left 4 Dead?
What's there to explain? Is Left4Dead an MMO? As far as I was aware it's an FPS, isn't it?
I wouldn't want to compare an FPS to MMO. Unless you start talking about games like Darkfall. But as far as we know, TOR won't have twitch combat. Adding twitch combat also adds a whole different dimension to the encounters, a lot changes. I am pretty sure that in twitch combat the "non"-Trinity could be realized better.
Hmmm, gonna have to think about this again.
If you were talking about interdependency, I think I actually explained that wrong in my first post. No interdependency is of course not true, since you would still need more than one person to beat certain scenarios. I was more talking about the interdependency in a fight itself. As in, a damage-soaker can't, at the same time, put out insane DPS, and a DPS can't at the same time heal etc.
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
Final Fantasy 7