Why would you play something you don't like...It's the same with classed, if you don't like a healer don't play it. Games are suppose to be fun, not something you hate to do because thats what is expected of you.
The problem here really is the whole trinity system of combat. Rift is a game that boast all these options, with the soul trees that allows players to play their class exactly how they want. However just like the majority of trinity MMOs it becomes known that a certain class will be known best for it's "healing, tanking, DPSing, etc." and so those classes will end up pigeonholded into those catergories. Quite frankly I find that counter-intuitive to the MMO genre, which should be about bringing people together. Rift did take a step forward in the right direction, with its public grouping & rifts but the holy trinity is really what's holding it back. Because you'll always get people saying "You're doing it wrong!", even if you specced you character the way you wanted to spec it and you're really good & having a lot of fun with it, you'll always be pigeonheld into you're class' well-known role.
This is why a game like Guild Wars 2 cannot come soon enough, because instead of trying to side-step the issue like Rift has done; by allowing most of their classes to become viable healers or tanks, meaning you won't have to spend too long looking for one. The team behind Guild Wars 2 are trying to tackle the issue by removing the archaic holy trinity and giving the player options to define their own playstyle. Even The Secret World is doing something similar to this philosophy of combat but I'm not sure if that game still follows the same tank, healer, DPS thing. Can someone clarify, cause I remember seeing a vid where some guy was healing?
You make it sound like specialization hurts group play, when in fact the opposite is true.
It boils down to the question "Why should I group?"
In games where characters can do everything (can do everything at any given moment), the answer is a weak "Uh, I guess because we damage things a bit faster."
In games where characters have strong roles, the answer is a strong "Obviously I have to group -- there's no way I could survive being hit like a tank can, or heal like a healer can, or deal damage like a DPSer can."
This is only one route to go when characters are allowed. The game could be designed in many ways.
Everyone can do everything, but not at the same time.
Everyone can do everything, but not in sufficient amounts to be successful alone.
Everyone can do everything, but there are more mobs than a single player can deal with.
... [insert more cases where everyone can do everything but still cannot survive on their own]...
In all three cases, players must group, despite being able to do everything, because they still require others to be successful.
Forever looking for employment. Life is rather dull without it.
My friend played EQ2 as a Druid and, as I understand it, it is supposed to be some sort of a HOT-healer - a healer nontheless. Now, EQ2 wasn't very balanced and my friend came up with this special build that would transform the Druid into a "DPS machine". As long as there were other healers in the group nobody didn't mind or didn't notice that he didn't heal much, but what they did notice is that he was the one doing the most dmg in the group - more than the supposed DPS classes. And people still insisted that he should be a healer. Unbelievable.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
Why would you play something you don't like...It's the same with classed, if you don't like a healer don't play it. Games are suppose to be fun, not something you hate to do because thats what is expected of you.
People play for different reasons. For some people, the results (achievement) are more important than the fun in attaining the results and thus they will choose to do things that are not fun to attain their goal.
Forever looking for employment. Life is rather dull without it.
My friend played EQ2 as a Druid and, as I understand it, it is supposed to be some sort of a HOT-healer - a healer nontheless. Now, EQ2 wasn't very balanced and my friend came up with this special build that would transform the Druid into a "DPS machine". As long as there were other healers in the group nobody didn't mind or didn't notice that he didn't heal much, but what they did notice is that he was the one doing the most dmg in the group - more than the supposed DPS classes. And people still insisted that he should be a healer. Unbelievable.
[Waits for someone to step in and still claim that it is about game mechanics and not player mentality]
Forever looking for employment. Life is rather dull without it.
My friend played EQ2 as a Druid and, as I understand it, it is supposed to be some sort of a HOT-healer - a healer nontheless. Now, EQ2 wasn't very balanced and my friend came up with this special build that would transform the Druid into a "DPS machine". As long as there were other healers in the group nobody didn't mind or didn't notice that he didn't heal much, but what they did notice is that he was the one doing the most dmg in the group - more than the supposed DPS classes. And people still insisted that he should be a healer. Unbelievable.
To be honest, if he signed up to the group as a healer (or, as you suggest, people assumed he was a healer when he was signing up because that's all druids played) then he should've probably been healing.
My friend played EQ2 as a Druid and, as I understand it, it is supposed to be some sort of a HOT-healer - a healer nontheless. Now, EQ2 wasn't very balanced and my friend came up with this special build that would transform the Druid into a "DPS machine". As long as there were other healers in the group nobody didn't mind or didn't notice that he didn't heal much, but what they did notice is that he was the one doing the most dmg in the group - more than the supposed DPS classes. And people still insisted that he should be a healer. Unbelievable.
To be honest, if he signed up to the group as a healer (or, as you suggest, people assumed he was a healer when he was signing up because that's all druids played) then he should've probably been healing.
Could you link me this build, by the by?
In the assumptions, there were other healers taking care of the healing.
eq2flames.com go to the warden forum. You'll find something similar to when ever this event occured. It isn't like it is a secret that warden's used to have good dps.
Most likely the dps were bad (even during the awesome warden dps days). EQ2 is very, very sensitive to proper rotation.
Forever looking for employment. Life is rather dull without it.
The problem doesn't rest with just the mechanics or the players but both of them. The holy trinity is simple to use and doesn't require a lot of interaction between the players. However, the players are just as at fault for sticking to the holy trinity even if there are other options available. The only real solution to this is to completely remove the trinity from the game. With the removal of the trinity it allows other grouping strategies to be more viable and players will interact more when they group.
The problem here really is the whole trinity system of combat and AI design.
I finished the sentence for you. PC combat to AI behavior in combat has to somewhat compliment each other. We don't have smart AI yet. Until we see a change of AI behaviors we won't see the holy trinity system improve or be omitted. I personally like the whole trinity system because each role is a working part in a cohesive body. It allows smooth teamwork. I am not sure how Gw2 without the healing archetype is going to work. We'll see, but I am putting my money that it will further hinder the balancing aspect of classes and still have the same effect we see in Rift.
The important take away from this discussion is that GOOD players will play to the strengths of a class to their, and others benefits. You need a healer, but he's only interested in dps, even though he may be the only one the potential to assist the group, then kick him and find someone else or just refuse to assist them. Let the guy draw aggro and die.
I've encountered these types before and they either learn or they don't, it's not your place to teach them, but it's also not your place to waste your hard earned sub dollars carrying them either.
The important take away from this discussion is that GOOD players will play to the strengths of a class to their, and others benefits. You need a healer, but he's only interested in dps, even though he may be the only one the potential to assist the group, then kick him and find someone else or just refuse to assist them. Let the guy draw aggro and die.
I've encountered these types before and they either learn or they don't, it's not your place to teach them, but it's also not your place to waste your hard earned sub dollars carrying them either.
Normally I'm an elitist but a shadow priest may be no more equipped or experienced at healing than a warlock, even if the shadowpriest has the spec available.
>.> Kick the warlock, he doesn't even have dispersion.
There's a lot of reasons you might be carrying them, including "they're missing an important talent for the tree they want to play", but you are not carrying someone strictly because you need a healer and they won't heal. As matter of fact, you're not doing anything because noone will heal.
"Learn a new spec, or else!" is as ludicrous as saying "Get on your shaman alt, or else!".
(I only play tanks and healers, I love the responsibility and the control and I also hate when I'm in support of my dps friends who may and often do dps better than me. I'd no sooner switch to dps than some of them would switch to tank, healer, or in diffferent games, other support classes like bard and summoner.)
Spec'ing properly is a gateway drug. 12 Million People have been meter spammed in heroics.
read most of the posts on here and have to say some of you really shouldnt post in here unless you actually read what the OP is talking about and actually have experience with that specific event in rift...
1) when a rift occurs you can maybe get thru the first 4 stages of it... after that you have a boss... the boss has abilities that can drop tanks from full health to maybe a 1/4 or less health... some of the major rifts dont occur this way... the bosses have for exp. i am a level 28 cleric and the major rift boss we had to fight last night in stonefield had 500k health... with about 20 other people my level it took us about 6mins real time to kill it... during these events you could in reality MAYBE get thru them without a healer... but you will die... groups of the raids will die... the aoe and sometimes adds will kill people... if you are a cleric there should be no reason to have a healing soul in any of your specs... some of the dps souls even have heals built in to them... playing a mmorpg that gives you the ability to have multiple ways to play should be a no brainer as to why someone would ask you to heal a lil bit to survive something... if you only want to play dps or your spec atm isnt healing then a simple "hey im not a healer" or "i only have two specs one melee and the other range dps" you dont have to swear at someone and get mad at them for asking...
2) he wasnt asking for a dungeon group... i am the type of player that gets enjoyment out of filling a group roll to accomplish the greater goal... why shovel shit with 8 other people when i could get the tractor and haul it away?
3) at 28 i have 3 specs i can go... i have my pure healer one, my tanking one, and a melee dps that cant fill a healing roll but can throw a heal out once in a while to ease it for others... my tank spec also has a self heal and a aoe group/raid heal... if you are playing a mmorpg you should think long and hard (for the less intelligent) before rolling a class thats known for heals... your playing a mmorpg... with thousands of others per server... if everyone rolled a class that was a cleric or warrior or some other non-solo skill tree dps class and only went dps cuz they didnt like tanking or healing then alot of things wouldnt be seen in games... hell even i dont like healing every single time im in a group... but if we lose our healing in a dungeon or our tank or a dps i know i can fill each roll... to let us continue on... because playing a mmorpg requires that people do something for the rest of others... something to think about people... the community in alot of games have gone down from the early days... lets change it for the best. bite the bullet and get off your high horse cuz you've played a million other mmorpg's... you should go into each one with an open mind cuz there's always something new to learn and classes change from one to another
You make it sound like specialization hurts group play, when in fact the opposite is true.
It boils down to the question "Why should I group?"
In games where characters can do everything (can do everything at any given moment), the answer is a weak "Uh, I guess because we damage things a bit faster."
In games where characters have strong roles, the answer is a strong "Obviously I have to group -- there's no way I could survive being hit like a tank can, or heal like a healer can, or deal damage like a DPSer can."
This is only one route to go when characters are allowed. The game could be designed in many ways.
Everyone can do everything, but not at the same time.
Everyone can do everything, but not in sufficient amounts to be successful alone.
Everyone can do everything, but there are more mobs than a single player can deal with.
... [insert more cases where everyone can do everything but still cannot survive on their own]...
In all three cases, players must group, despite being able to do everything, because they still require others to be successful.
Well what I'm describing is that the need for grouping is less clear (and/or weaker) when players aren't specialized.
Whether they can switch roles between fights is irrelevant (and thankfully developers have realized this and let us respec freely). But specialization during any given fight is what matters for creating a strong grouping game where players are reliant on each others' strengths to offset personal weaknesses.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I play sandbox with no classes never have this problem, wanne play a themepark you have to learn with this attitude players have these days, NUFF SAID:)
Games played:AC1-Darktide'99-2000-AC2-Darktide/dawnsong2003-2005,Lineage2-2005-2006 and now Darkfall-2009..... In between WoW few months AoC few months and some f2p also all very short few weeks.
Everytime i join a Warfront i look over the group. If i see a cleric i assume he's there to dps and not heal so i swap over to bard. Same thing goes for Rifts or invasions. I've come to the realization that there are far too many melee clerics and not enough healing ones. It's up to us to change our perception and not assume that because people are clerics that they like healing. Personally i think that if they rolled one, they should have a healing spec, but that's me.
Now if i form a dungeon group and ask for a healer and a cleric responds for that role but refuses to heal anyways, then he gets kicked. It's as simple as that. I don't have time to argue or hold people's hands. People like that are wasting my and my groups time.
Long story short is, i'm tired of hearing "it's my $15 so i'll play how i want". That's fine and dandy for solo play, but not how MMO's should work. Call me old fashioned or whatever, but i get more satisfaction out of maximizing the group first before my own personal gains.
Doesn't it really depend on where you are at in the game? In open world grouping it shouldn't matter, at least not to any great extent. Same with PvP. But in the case of Raids, I think that people are expected to fill a role, and justifiably so.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
Alders - I'm right there with you. Good players play as you do.
I find the players that pull the attitude and refuse to heal - when it is obviously needed - are generally speaking, pretty useless no matter what they do.
However... in a group with no heals an awful healer is better than another (likely awful) dps, so I ask. I'll ask nicely if I still think they match is in doubt.... and when all hope looks lost, I'll berate them a little to take out my frustration!
And for the record... when I'm playing either my rogue or cleric - as I enjoy winning vs. "I'm DPS no matter what!!!111!!" - after a couple of minutes, I check the score and adjust my role as needed (it's also a good time to check what is going on with the other team and identify key targets).
This sounds a lot like you're saying "Rather than change my own preconceived notions of class capabilities, and how players have fun, I'd prefer games to be designed in a way that's less fun to the majority of people."
All you have to do is go "LFM Tank" and POOF you're gonna find people who want to tank (just like you did in every game before the ones that let players flexibly switch roles.)
Just seems weird to want the genre to take a huge step backwards in fun, just because you're unwilling to change your preconceived notions of class capabilities.
If you think the majority of people don't use cookie cutter builds and/or not have fun using cookie cutter builds then I think it's your own preconceived notions that are getting in the way.
I'm saying make classes more like those seen in for example DotA and HoN. Ofcourse not with just 4 abilities and 6 equipment slots but with the same design idea in mind.
To take HoN as an example. Plaguerider is support. That's all he is. He's not a carry. He can't even be a carry. Madman is a carry. He can't support. He's a carry.
In a group in a game like that it's a clear WYSIWYG. If you see a madman you know he's going to carry. At worst he'll be a bad carry. But he'll never be support.
In a trinity MMO classes should imho be designed like this because in a trinity MMO a majority of players will use cookie cutter builds anyway. So why waste design time on making sub-optimal choices possible?
I'd totally agree with you in a skill-based system or even GW2's system. But we're not talking about those systems. We're talking about a trinity system. A trinity system inherintly forces people into certain roles, nothing wrong with that but you do have to recognise it.
A trinity system is about specialisation and roles. It's not about player freedom. If you want player freedom then choose a progression system that supports player freedom like a skill-based system. Don't try to force it into a system that clearly doesn't support it.
If you think that's not fun then that's fine. But there's millions of people ( probably the majority of WoW players alone ) that are perfectly happy using cookie cutter builds and have tons of fun with them. Those millions don't mind much at all that there really isn't all that much choice for their character and they have only 2/3 viable specs to chose from. If they didn't have fun with that then they wouldn't be playing trinity-based games. They'd be playing Darkfall, EvE, Ryzom etc.
But they're not. They enjoy cookie cutter builds. They enjoy being able to quickly know the "best" builds and not worry about them anymore. They enjoy knowing that a warrior is played in either way A, B or maybe C. They don't want to worry about ways D, E, F ... Z, A1, B1 ... Z99.
That's the trinity system. Every single trinity games has cookie cutter builds. Every single trinity game has lots and lots of users, mostly the silent majority, perfectly happy with those cookie cutter builds.
If you don't like cookie cutter builds then also nothing wrong with that. The trinity system isn't the only one. EvE is doing things diffirently and having great succes. Darkfall is doing things diffirently and seems to be doing fine. GW2 will be doing things diffirently and could be a huge succes.
But if you're going with a trinity system then you're going to have cookie cutter builds and you're going to have optimal ways to play. You might as well design for them.
We are the bunny. Resistance is futile. ''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\ ( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o) (")("),,(")("),(")(")
If I wanted to deal with gearscore-infatuated know-your-role jackasses I would go do raids in WOW.
Tss tsss tss... nice stereotyping here, Lokto.... not your style usually.
Mind you, we have kicked people from my raiding guild in WoW for behaving like you describe here. People who belittle others in the group because they made a mistake, not played like the "elite jackasses" think they should have, or any other reason, aren't welcome.
Respect, walk, what did you say? Respect, walk Are you talkin' to me? Are you talkin' to me? - PANTERA at HELLFEST 2023
This sounds a lot like you're saying "Rather than change my own preconceived notions of class capabilities, and how players have fun, I'd prefer games to be designed in a way that's less fun to the majority of people."
All you have to do is go "LFM Tank" and POOF you're gonna find people who want to tank (just like you did in every game before the ones that let players flexibly switch roles.)
Just seems weird to want the genre to take a huge step backwards in fun, just because you're unwilling to change your preconceived notions of class capabilities.
If you think the majority of people don't use cookie cutter builds and/or not have fun using cookie cutter builds then I think it's your own preconceived notions that are getting in the way.
I'm saying make classes more like those seen in for example DotA and HoN. Ofcourse not with just 4 abilities and 6 equipment slots but with the same design idea in mind.
To take HoN as an example. Plaguerider is support. That's all he is. He's not a carry. He can't even be a carry. Madman is a carry. He can't support. He's a carry.
In a group in a game like that it's a clear WYSIWYG. If you see a madman you know he's going to carry. At worst he'll be a bad carry. But he'll never be support.
In a trinity MMO classes should imho be designed like this because in a trinity MMO a majority of players will use cookie cutter builds anyway. So why waste design time on making sub-optimal choices possible?
I'd totally agree with you in a skill-based system or even GW2's system. But we're not talking about those systems. We're talking about a trinity system. A trinity system inherintly forces people into certain roles, nothing wrong with that but you do have to recognise it.
A trinity system is about specialisation and roles. It's not about player freedom. If you want player freedom then choose a progression system that supports player freedom like a skill-based system. Don't try to force it into a system that clearly doesn't support it.
If you think that's not fun then that's fine. But there's millions of people ( probably the majority of WoW players alone ) that are perfectly happy using cookie cutter builds and have tons of fun with them. Those millions don't mind much at all that there really isn't all that much choice for their character and they have only 2/3 viable specs to chose from. If they didn't have fun with that then they wouldn't be playing trinity-based games. They'd be playing Darkfall, EvE, Ryzom etc.
But they're not. They enjoy cookie cutter builds. They enjoy being able to quickly know the "best" builds and not worry about them anymore. They enjoy knowing that a warrior is played in either way A, B or maybe C. They don't want to worry about ways D, E, F ... Z, A1, B1 ... Z99.
That's the trinity system. Every single trinity games has cookie cutter builds. Every single trinity game has lots and lots of users, mostly the silent majority, perfectly happy with those cookie cutter builds.
If you don't like cookie cutter builds then also nothing wrong with that. The trinity system isn't the only one. EvE is doing things diffirently and having great succes. Darkfall is doing things diffirently and seems to be doing fine. GW2 will be doing things diffirently and could be a huge succes.
But if you're going with a trinity system then you're going to have cookie cutter builds and you're going to have optimal ways to play. You might as well design for them.
Again, your entire argument is 'No trinity game did it before, so it can't work!' which is completely nonsensical.
Again, if you create a group and ask for tanks, you'll get tanks -- who cares if they're called "clerics" or "warriors" or "rogues", you got a tank for your group!
It works. You can't really dispute the fact that if you ask for a tank (or DPS or healer) in the games which allow flexible role-switching, you get what you ask for!
Your insistence that trinity systems cannot be about player freedom is arbitrary and self-imposed. It's not based in fact or logic, it's simply a preconceived notion. And it's wrong.
(Also, "cookie cutter" builds lack any relevance to a discussion on whether players should have the flexibility to switch roles.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I specify ahead of time what I am looking for in a group. If a player joins our group and says they will fulfill that role then I expect the player to do so.
If I am just forming a random group for shits and giggles or without any advance notice for whatever reason I don't expect a player to fill any specific role. I simply expect them to play to the best of their abilities, help out the group as much as possible, and above all...have fun.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
Again, your entire argument is 'No trinity game did it before, so it can't work!' which is completely nonsensical.
Again, if you create a group and ask for tanks, you'll get tanks -- who cares if they're called "clerics" or "warriors" or "rogues", you got a tank for your group!
It works. You can't really dispute the fact that if you ask for a tank (or DPS or healer) in the games which allow flexible role-switching, you get what you ask for!
Your insistence that trinity systems cannot be about player freedom is arbitrary and self-imposed. It's not based in fact or logic, it's simply a preconceived notion. And it's wrong.
(Also, "cookie cutter" builds lack any relevance to a discussion on whether players should have the flexibility to switch roles.)
It's simple mathematics and some psychology.
Classes won't be equal. As such each class will have, despite the best efforts of developers, diffirent amounts of succes filling various roles.
Let's take 3 classes and give them a rating based on their healing, damage and tanking abilities.
Class 1: 8/10 Healing, 6/10 Damage and 2/10 Tanking. Obviously some sort of priestly class.
Class 2: 7/10 Healing, 5/10 Damage and 8/10 Tanking. Some sort of strong paladin class.
Class 3: 4/10 Healing, 8/10 Damage and 7/10 Tanking. Some sort of warrior class.
Now these guys party up. They can spend their time doing either Healing, Damage or Tanking. The party gets a score based on the totals of the classes.
Say class 1 does 25% healing and 75% damage while class 2 would do 50% healing and 50% tanking and class 3 100% damage then the party score would be: Healing: 5,5 Damage: 12,5 and Tanking: 4.
Now the optimal party is simple. Each class does what he's best at. Which means class 1 only heals. Class 2 only tanks and Class 3 only damages. That's the maths.
Somebody is going to do those maths and that somebody is going to post that on the forums as a guide. Now people are going to read that guide and they're going to play like that in-game. They'll then tell other players to play like that. Because unfortunately that's the way people are. Why would you want someone to be good at one thing when the opportunity cost is being great at something else? Because even if you're not thinking "You know, we could be doing better if only I/"that guy" was filling another role" somebody else will be. Even if everyone is having fun, somebody will be thinking they could be having more fun if someone else played the more optimal way.
And you're totally right when you're saying that it's not fair, reasonable or right that people thinking like that determine the way others play. But unfortunately that doesn't matter. You'll still see a decent part of your playerbase expecting others to play the "optimal" way. As shown by this thread along with many others and countless in-game fights the classes that make better healers then DPS and/or tanks will be expected to heal, the classes that make better tanks then they do DPS and/or Healers will be expected to tank etc.
Of course there are exceptions. There will be mature laidback guilds that allow classes to fill sub-optimal roles. But a decent part of the playerbase will expect you to fill your optimal role, just look at how common it is for people to bitch against shadow priests and MDPS clerics. The question is will those mature laidback guilds mind if suddenly classes are no longer able to fill sub-optimal roles? Or will they just pick another class to play to begin with?
Should you spend valueable design time on sub-optimal roles for a class that firstly only a small amount of your playerbase will use and secondly create a lot of raging in groups? Or should you spend that design time on more usefull things?
It's not about it being impossible to work. It's about it taking a lot of time to make it work. Time that could be spend on other things that would improve the game a lot more then adding sub-optimal roles to classes would.
We are the bunny. Resistance is futile. ''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\ ( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o) (")("),,(")("),(")(")
I'm not so much against roles as I am against predesigned roles. I'm also in favor of classless systems. I don't have huge issues with the "healer/tank/DPS" system, but at least offer more. Those systems are popular because they are simple and easy to pick up, and I think it works for games like WoW; it's just not my cup of tea. It seems like we've stepped away from experimentation. I, for one, think it's fun to try and make two random builds work.
Another thing is that the Holy Trinity setup works. I think the emphasis of games has shifted a little to the most effective/efficient, and games are being formed around that mindset.
I like games where there really aren't any predetermined roles, but still have the freedom to conform to traditional archetypes if players want.
Comments
Why would you play something you don't like...It's the same with classed, if you don't like a healer don't play it. Games are suppose to be fun, not something you hate to do because thats what is expected of you.
This is only one route to go when characters are allowed. The game could be designed in many ways.
Everyone can do everything, but not at the same time.
Everyone can do everything, but not in sufficient amounts to be successful alone.
Everyone can do everything, but there are more mobs than a single player can deal with.
... [insert more cases where everyone can do everything but still cannot survive on their own]...
In all three cases, players must group, despite being able to do everything, because they still require others to be successful.
Forever looking for employment. Life is rather dull without it.
One story comes to mind.
My friend played EQ2 as a Druid and, as I understand it, it is supposed to be some sort of a HOT-healer - a healer nontheless. Now, EQ2 wasn't very balanced and my friend came up with this special build that would transform the Druid into a "DPS machine". As long as there were other healers in the group nobody didn't mind or didn't notice that he didn't heal much, but what they did notice is that he was the one doing the most dmg in the group - more than the supposed DPS classes. And people still insisted that he should be a healer. Unbelievable.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
People play for different reasons. For some people, the results (achievement) are more important than the fun in attaining the results and thus they will choose to do things that are not fun to attain their goal.
Forever looking for employment. Life is rather dull without it.
[Waits for someone to step in and still claim that it is about game mechanics and not player mentality]
Forever looking for employment. Life is rather dull without it.
To be honest, if he signed up to the group as a healer (or, as you suggest, people assumed he was a healer when he was signing up because that's all druids played) then he should've probably been healing.
Could you link me this build, by the by?
Add me on Steam!
Me and a Friend are Bad At Games
In the assumptions, there were other healers taking care of the healing.
eq2flames.com go to the warden forum. You'll find something similar to when ever this event occured. It isn't like it is a secret that warden's used to have good dps.
Most likely the dps were bad (even during the awesome warden dps days). EQ2 is very, very sensitive to proper rotation.
Forever looking for employment. Life is rather dull without it.
The problem doesn't rest with just the mechanics or the players but both of them. The holy trinity is simple to use and doesn't require a lot of interaction between the players. However, the players are just as at fault for sticking to the holy trinity even if there are other options available. The only real solution to this is to completely remove the trinity from the game. With the removal of the trinity it allows other grouping strategies to be more viable and players will interact more when they group.
I finished the sentence for you. PC combat to AI behavior in combat has to somewhat compliment each other. We don't have smart AI yet. Until we see a change of AI behaviors we won't see the holy trinity system improve or be omitted. I personally like the whole trinity system because each role is a working part in a cohesive body. It allows smooth teamwork. I am not sure how Gw2 without the healing archetype is going to work. We'll see, but I am putting my money that it will further hinder the balancing aspect of classes and still have the same effect we see in Rift.
The important take away from this discussion is that GOOD players will play to the strengths of a class to their, and others benefits. You need a healer, but he's only interested in dps, even though he may be the only one the potential to assist the group, then kick him and find someone else or just refuse to assist them. Let the guy draw aggro and die.
I've encountered these types before and they either learn or they don't, it's not your place to teach them, but it's also not your place to waste your hard earned sub dollars carrying them either.
Warhammer fanatic since '85.
Normally I'm an elitist but a shadow priest may be no more equipped or experienced at healing than a warlock, even if the shadowpriest has the spec available.
>.> Kick the warlock, he doesn't even have dispersion.
There's a lot of reasons you might be carrying them, including "they're missing an important talent for the tree they want to play", but you are not carrying someone strictly because you need a healer and they won't heal. As matter of fact, you're not doing anything because noone will heal.
"Learn a new spec, or else!" is as ludicrous as saying "Get on your shaman alt, or else!".
(I only play tanks and healers, I love the responsibility and the control and I also hate when I'm in support of my dps friends who may and often do dps better than me. I'd no sooner switch to dps than some of them would switch to tank, healer, or in diffferent games, other support classes like bard and summoner.)
Spec'ing properly is a gateway drug.
12 Million People have been meter spammed in heroics.
read most of the posts on here and have to say some of you really shouldnt post in here unless you actually read what the OP is talking about and actually have experience with that specific event in rift...
1) when a rift occurs you can maybe get thru the first 4 stages of it... after that you have a boss... the boss has abilities that can drop tanks from full health to maybe a 1/4 or less health... some of the major rifts dont occur this way... the bosses have for exp. i am a level 28 cleric and the major rift boss we had to fight last night in stonefield had 500k health... with about 20 other people my level it took us about 6mins real time to kill it... during these events you could in reality MAYBE get thru them without a healer... but you will die... groups of the raids will die... the aoe and sometimes adds will kill people... if you are a cleric there should be no reason to have a healing soul in any of your specs... some of the dps souls even have heals built in to them... playing a mmorpg that gives you the ability to have multiple ways to play should be a no brainer as to why someone would ask you to heal a lil bit to survive something... if you only want to play dps or your spec atm isnt healing then a simple "hey im not a healer" or "i only have two specs one melee and the other range dps" you dont have to swear at someone and get mad at them for asking...
2) he wasnt asking for a dungeon group... i am the type of player that gets enjoyment out of filling a group roll to accomplish the greater goal... why shovel shit with 8 other people when i could get the tractor and haul it away?
3) at 28 i have 3 specs i can go... i have my pure healer one, my tanking one, and a melee dps that cant fill a healing roll but can throw a heal out once in a while to ease it for others... my tank spec also has a self heal and a aoe group/raid heal... if you are playing a mmorpg you should think long and hard (for the less intelligent) before rolling a class thats known for heals... your playing a mmorpg... with thousands of others per server... if everyone rolled a class that was a cleric or warrior or some other non-solo skill tree dps class and only went dps cuz they didnt like tanking or healing then alot of things wouldnt be seen in games... hell even i dont like healing every single time im in a group... but if we lose our healing in a dungeon or our tank or a dps i know i can fill each roll... to let us continue on... because playing a mmorpg requires that people do something for the rest of others... something to think about people... the community in alot of games have gone down from the early days... lets change it for the best. bite the bullet and get off your high horse cuz you've played a million other mmorpg's... you should go into each one with an open mind cuz there's always something new to learn and classes change from one to another
Well what I'm describing is that the need for grouping is less clear (and/or weaker) when players aren't specialized.
Whether they can switch roles between fights is irrelevant (and thankfully developers have realized this and let us respec freely). But specialization during any given fight is what matters for creating a strong grouping game where players are reliant on each others' strengths to offset personal weaknesses.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Exactly, man.
Add me on Steam!
Me and a Friend are Bad At Games
I play sandbox with no classes never have this problem, wanne play a themepark you have to learn with this attitude players have these days, NUFF SAID:)
Games played:AC1-Darktide'99-2000-AC2-Darktide/dawnsong2003-2005,Lineage2-2005-2006 and now Darkfall-2009.....
In between WoW few months AoC few months and some f2p also all very short few weeks.
Everytime i join a Warfront i look over the group. If i see a cleric i assume he's there to dps and not heal so i swap over to bard. Same thing goes for Rifts or invasions. I've come to the realization that there are far too many melee clerics and not enough healing ones. It's up to us to change our perception and not assume that because people are clerics that they like healing. Personally i think that if they rolled one, they should have a healing spec, but that's me.
Now if i form a dungeon group and ask for a healer and a cleric responds for that role but refuses to heal anyways, then he gets kicked. It's as simple as that. I don't have time to argue or hold people's hands. People like that are wasting my and my groups time.
Long story short is, i'm tired of hearing "it's my $15 so i'll play how i want". That's fine and dandy for solo play, but not how MMO's should work. Call me old fashioned or whatever, but i get more satisfaction out of maximizing the group first before my own personal gains.
Doesn't it really depend on where you are at in the game? In open world grouping it shouldn't matter, at least not to any great extent. Same with PvP. But in the case of Raids, I think that people are expected to fill a role, and justifiably so.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
I don't hate much, but I hate Apple© with a passion. If Steve Jobs was alive, I would punch him in the face.
Alders - I'm right there with you. Good players play as you do.
I find the players that pull the attitude and refuse to heal - when it is obviously needed - are generally speaking, pretty useless no matter what they do.
However... in a group with no heals an awful healer is better than another (likely awful) dps, so I ask. I'll ask nicely if I still think they match is in doubt.... and when all hope looks lost, I'll berate them a little to take out my frustration!
And for the record... when I'm playing either my rogue or cleric - as I enjoy winning vs. "I'm DPS no matter what!!!111!!" - after a couple of minutes, I check the score and adjust my role as needed (it's also a good time to check what is going on with the other team and identify key targets).
If you think the majority of people don't use cookie cutter builds and/or not have fun using cookie cutter builds then I think it's your own preconceived notions that are getting in the way.
I'm saying make classes more like those seen in for example DotA and HoN. Ofcourse not with just 4 abilities and 6 equipment slots but with the same design idea in mind.
To take HoN as an example. Plaguerider is support. That's all he is. He's not a carry. He can't even be a carry. Madman is a carry. He can't support. He's a carry.
In a group in a game like that it's a clear WYSIWYG. If you see a madman you know he's going to carry. At worst he'll be a bad carry. But he'll never be support.
In a trinity MMO classes should imho be designed like this because in a trinity MMO a majority of players will use cookie cutter builds anyway. So why waste design time on making sub-optimal choices possible?
I'd totally agree with you in a skill-based system or even GW2's system. But we're not talking about those systems. We're talking about a trinity system. A trinity system inherintly forces people into certain roles, nothing wrong with that but you do have to recognise it.
A trinity system is about specialisation and roles. It's not about player freedom. If you want player freedom then choose a progression system that supports player freedom like a skill-based system. Don't try to force it into a system that clearly doesn't support it.
If you think that's not fun then that's fine. But there's millions of people ( probably the majority of WoW players alone ) that are perfectly happy using cookie cutter builds and have tons of fun with them. Those millions don't mind much at all that there really isn't all that much choice for their character and they have only 2/3 viable specs to chose from. If they didn't have fun with that then they wouldn't be playing trinity-based games. They'd be playing Darkfall, EvE, Ryzom etc.
But they're not. They enjoy cookie cutter builds. They enjoy being able to quickly know the "best" builds and not worry about them anymore. They enjoy knowing that a warrior is played in either way A, B or maybe C. They don't want to worry about ways D, E, F ... Z, A1, B1 ... Z99.
That's the trinity system. Every single trinity games has cookie cutter builds. Every single trinity game has lots and lots of users, mostly the silent majority, perfectly happy with those cookie cutter builds.
If you don't like cookie cutter builds then also nothing wrong with that. The trinity system isn't the only one. EvE is doing things diffirently and having great succes. Darkfall is doing things diffirently and seems to be doing fine. GW2 will be doing things diffirently and could be a huge succes.
But if you're going with a trinity system then you're going to have cookie cutter builds and you're going to have optimal ways to play. You might as well design for them.
We are the bunny.
Resistance is futile.
''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\
( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o)
(")("),,(")("),(")(")
Tss tsss tss... nice stereotyping here, Lokto.... not your style usually.
Mind you, we have kicked people from my raiding guild in WoW for behaving like you describe here. People who belittle others in the group because they made a mistake, not played like the "elite jackasses" think they should have, or any other reason, aren't welcome.
Respect, walk
Are you talkin' to me? Are you talkin' to me?
- PANTERA at HELLFEST 2023
Again, your entire argument is 'No trinity game did it before, so it can't work!' which is completely nonsensical.
Again, if you create a group and ask for tanks, you'll get tanks -- who cares if they're called "clerics" or "warriors" or "rogues", you got a tank for your group!
It works. You can't really dispute the fact that if you ask for a tank (or DPS or healer) in the games which allow flexible role-switching, you get what you ask for!
Your insistence that trinity systems cannot be about player freedom is arbitrary and self-imposed. It's not based in fact or logic, it's simply a preconceived notion. And it's wrong.
(Also, "cookie cutter" builds lack any relevance to a discussion on whether players should have the flexibility to switch roles.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I specify ahead of time what I am looking for in a group. If a player joins our group and says they will fulfill that role then I expect the player to do so.
If I am just forming a random group for shits and giggles or without any advance notice for whatever reason I don't expect a player to fill any specific role. I simply expect them to play to the best of their abilities, help out the group as much as possible, and above all...have fun.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
It's simple mathematics and some psychology.
Classes won't be equal. As such each class will have, despite the best efforts of developers, diffirent amounts of succes filling various roles.
Let's take 3 classes and give them a rating based on their healing, damage and tanking abilities.
Class 1: 8/10 Healing, 6/10 Damage and 2/10 Tanking. Obviously some sort of priestly class.
Class 2: 7/10 Healing, 5/10 Damage and 8/10 Tanking. Some sort of strong paladin class.
Class 3: 4/10 Healing, 8/10 Damage and 7/10 Tanking. Some sort of warrior class.
Now these guys party up. They can spend their time doing either Healing, Damage or Tanking. The party gets a score based on the totals of the classes.
Say class 1 does 25% healing and 75% damage while class 2 would do 50% healing and 50% tanking and class 3 100% damage then the party score would be: Healing: 5,5 Damage: 12,5 and Tanking: 4.
Now the optimal party is simple. Each class does what he's best at. Which means class 1 only heals. Class 2 only tanks and Class 3 only damages. That's the maths.
Somebody is going to do those maths and that somebody is going to post that on the forums as a guide. Now people are going to read that guide and they're going to play like that in-game. They'll then tell other players to play like that. Because unfortunately that's the way people are. Why would you want someone to be good at one thing when the opportunity cost is being great at something else? Because even if you're not thinking "You know, we could be doing better if only I/"that guy" was filling another role" somebody else will be. Even if everyone is having fun, somebody will be thinking they could be having more fun if someone else played the more optimal way.
And you're totally right when you're saying that it's not fair, reasonable or right that people thinking like that determine the way others play. But unfortunately that doesn't matter. You'll still see a decent part of your playerbase expecting others to play the "optimal" way. As shown by this thread along with many others and countless in-game fights the classes that make better healers then DPS and/or tanks will be expected to heal, the classes that make better tanks then they do DPS and/or Healers will be expected to tank etc.
Of course there are exceptions. There will be mature laidback guilds that allow classes to fill sub-optimal roles. But a decent part of the playerbase will expect you to fill your optimal role, just look at how common it is for people to bitch against shadow priests and MDPS clerics. The question is will those mature laidback guilds mind if suddenly classes are no longer able to fill sub-optimal roles? Or will they just pick another class to play to begin with?
Should you spend valueable design time on sub-optimal roles for a class that firstly only a small amount of your playerbase will use and secondly create a lot of raging in groups? Or should you spend that design time on more usefull things?
It's not about it being impossible to work. It's about it taking a lot of time to make it work. Time that could be spend on other things that would improve the game a lot more then adding sub-optimal roles to classes would.
We are the bunny.
Resistance is futile.
''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\
( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o)
(")("),,(")("),(")(")
I'm not so much against roles as I am against predesigned roles. I'm also in favor of classless systems. I don't have huge issues with the "healer/tank/DPS" system, but at least offer more. Those systems are popular because they are simple and easy to pick up, and I think it works for games like WoW; it's just not my cup of tea. It seems like we've stepped away from experimentation. I, for one, think it's fun to try and make two random builds work.
Another thing is that the Holy Trinity setup works. I think the emphasis of games has shifted a little to the most effective/efficient, and games are being formed around that mindset.
I like games where there really aren't any predetermined roles, but still have the freedom to conform to traditional archetypes if players want.
How exactly would a class look like that would NOT benefit a group ?