I'm just going to target the original question with a response and admit I skipped most of the thread...
*I* am not against the Trinity...
I do personally find it boring to watch mobs brainlessly beat on an aggro generator.... while at best the rest of us dance around mechanics that really make no sense. To the point that most raids resemble something more akin to a console port.. than an RPG. Which is where the real irony comes in as people make negative comments directed at EQN and related to consoles... I'm not talking about "don't stand in the fire" its just the mechanics that feel more like donkey kong as opposed to something I would read about in the Krynn novels and think of how it would "play out".
You want to have a good time take a character in WoW any level from 24 to say 79 into a battleground... (probably any level but those ranges are great examples). Then watch what happens when your team plays together.. or when its just a bunch of people camping GY's, the roads etc... Trinity doesn't solve player choice... and some players just choose to be bad or at a minimum not doing anything useful.
Oh wait you say that's PvP... the point is that the entire push in EQN is this Emergent AI. Everything SOE is trying to do with combat depends on it. So the real discussion is the fact that if the AI fails.. the combat fails... I use the PvP example because the mob isn't supposed to run to the tank and just beat on them. Its supposed to be more like going up against an intelligent enemy and the standard way that people group play... does not fit that model.
Adaptation of the way you play and the class you play (thus not iconic roles) is done to fit what SOE is pushing. So your healer or dps may need a bit different mechanic to survive and the tank has to play differently to peel mobs off them. If players decide to play brainlessly SOE can't fix that... but if anything the people who take the time to work together should end up doing better as usual.
I would also say as someone that was on the UO Interest team (Great Lakes Shard) ... I saw plenty of events that were mine or that I helped with... where players with "no trinity" had to work as a team to keep each other alive and progress the event. So team play can certainly exist in either game type... but again it comes down to what players choose to do and how they choose to play. Most successful group/raid play has more to do with not taking people who would not help... than the trinity design...
Originally posted by kjempff A baker alone can make bread, but a baker & butcher & farmer & cook can make a sandwich, each got a role.
And the problem with the trinity, is that some believe that the baker should have the freedom of assigning himself wichever role he wants (within limits, if the baker makes it alone he'll make alot less bread) or if he has 3 baker friends, these baker friends choose wich new role they're going to take. There are still roles and you now have choice.
2. Whatever else you can press until 100 blades is off cool down.
(number 2 is optional)
If that's how you played your warrior, no surprise you got bored in GW2... anyone would get bored if he limited himself to use only like 5% of a class potential.
I don't have a warrior. I had the Mesmer who used Time Warp so the 4 warriors could spam 100 blades faster. That was my job, That's why I was there. Sure I did respectable DPS on my own, but Time Warp is why it's 4 Warriors and a Mesmer instead of 5 warriors spamming 100 Blades.
I hate to break it to you, but that 5% of the class's potential ( as you have called it) is all that is needed or wanted. I didn't create that situation, ANET did. I know you don't like it but that's GW2 Warrior for you. And yes, it is boring. Thus we have come back to the original reason for the post. The optimal build for a warrior is to spam 100 blades in a 100% full Zerker glass cannon gear with a build that is meant to optimize 1 single ability.
A.Net did not create that situation. Players with limited imagination did - they go the quick and easy route, not the imaginative route. That is why you will see in Trinity-based games specific builds are only looked for - someone found it worked, posted it on the net and others use it. That is the same with the build you mention above. That was created by the players not the company.
No A.Net did not setup the situation but players do exploit with one build if they can get the 'gold ring' easily.
2. Whatever else you can press until 100 blades is off cool down.
(number 2 is optional)
If that's how you played your warrior, no surprise you got bored in GW2... anyone would get bored if he limited himself to use only like 5% of a class potential.
I don't have a warrior. I had the Mesmer who used Time Warp so the 4 warriors could spam 100 blades faster. That was my job, That's why I was there. Sure I did respectable DPS on my own, but Time Warp is why it's 4 Warriors and a Mesmer instead of 5 warriors spamming 100 Blades.
I hate to break it to you, but that 5% of the class's potential ( as you have called it) is all that is needed or wanted. I didn't create that situation, ANET did. I know you don't like it but that's GW2 Warrior for you. And yes, it is boring. Thus we have come back to the original reason for the post. The optimal build for a warrior is to spam 100 blades in a 100% full Zerker glass cannon gear with a build that is meant to optimize 1 single ability.
A.Net did not create that situation. Players with limited imagination did - they go the quick and easy route, not the imaginative route. That is why you will see in Trinity-based games specific builds are only looked for - someone found it worked, posted it on the net and others use it. That is the same with the build you mention above. That was created by the players not the company.
No A.Net did not setup the situation but players do exploit with one build if they can get the 'gold ring' easily.
Nah a developer with poor imagination created that situation, the player just took advantage of it, as every developer knows will happen.
GW2's approach to the holy trinity was by far the most "low brow" approach. Heres innovation, lets just delete the damn roles and let everyone heal themselves ect. Boring.
The combat is far too simplistic, which is why the above scenario was not only viable (it should never be viable) but was also ideal (worse than just being viable)
They could have made the AI react to such spamming of moves, but they didn't. They could have added other layers and dimensions to combat to where the Mesmer buff was only ideal in some situations, but they didn't. They chose to more or less go the third person shooter route, life in defiance, where you just run around spamming stuff and if you die no big deal someone will bring you up and you can go back to spamming.
Its from a total lack of imagination that the solution to the self proclaimed "holy trinity problem" as ANET saw it to just delete the roles rather than modify and create a new system.
Deleting roles isn't innovating, its deleting roles. It was the easy way out, and with the simplistic combat makes for a bunch of people carelessly running around spamming their best attack and nothing else.
The developers need to create a reason to do other stuff or this happens, a good game would have developed some way to evolve the holy trinity and combat, an overhyped game bent on launch sales..well they just decided to go the easy route.
This is all why im very worried to see speech about EQN walking the line that GW2 took. It was the least innovative game ive seen in years, and boiled down to the lowest common denominator gamer who was looking for ease and accessibility above all else, the bane of modern mmorpgs.
I'm for the trinity. But I do understand one reason why some people might not like it, boredom.
The reason that many people don't like the trinity is because of the implementation of the trinity in many games. Healers in EQ1 were notoriously boring to play, requiring the player to pay attention to the health of teammates, select a teammate in distress and cast an appropriate heal spell, all while balancing their mana pool against the perceived remaining duration of the fight. In raids, especially in the early days, it became a game of 'stand, cast complete heal on target, alert the next in the heal chain and sit until it's your turn again.. Basically, a single hot key did everything.
This occurred in many games. Healing wasn't particularly enjoyable. Waiting until told, then hitting a single hotkey. If the game allowed a macro to 'watch the heal channel and fire the hotkey', the entire operation could be completely automated to operate under normal circumstances. How is a role like that ever going to be interesting, or challenging.for the player?
Likewise, the various DPS classes role is simply to pick an appropriate spot to stand, turn on attack, and periodically hit the buttons to add additional damage. It is a little more engaging than the relatively static role of healer, but requires little from the player except to know when it might be safe to apply some additional damage. Ultimately, this role can be repetitive, and that repetition can lead to boredom.
Tanking is the one really active role in the trinity. They try to maintain the target's attention while absorbing the brunt of the target's attacks. But even this is frequently a series of wait for the ability to refresh, and push the button again. An advanced version of whack-a-mole, in effect.
The support roles, puller, crowd control, off-tank, kiter, supplimental heal, slower, etc., have moments where they are occupied, and less bored. However, the content frequently determines when their contributions are even necessary. Even the class design (binary abilities such as Slow) often don't stack, leaving many players with nothing to do. Trust me, being the 4th enchanter on a 72 man EQ1 raid isn't anything special as far as engaging game play goes. When their specialist function is satisfied, these roles revert to DPS, where they aren't particularly useful.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Holy Trinity is a more team oriented approach. You have to trust and rely on your comrades. In a non Holy Trinity set up such as in Guild Wars 2, you do still work together as a team, but it also has a much more every man for himself feel. So I think it is similar to why many people prefer to solo over group when both are available paths. It is easier and more casual when you are not punished so much when a group member messes up like you would be in most Holy Trinity content.
2. Whatever else you can press until 100 blades is off cool down.
(number 2 is optional)
If that's how you played your warrior, no surprise you got bored in GW2... anyone would get bored if he limited himself to use only like 5% of a class potential.
I don't have a warrior. I had the Mesmer who used Time Warp so the 4 warriors could spam 100 blades faster. That was my job, That's why I was there. Sure I did respectable DPS on my own, but Time Warp is why it's 4 Warriors and a Mesmer instead of 5 warriors spamming 100 Blades.
I hate to break it to you, but that 5% of the class's potential ( as you have called it) is all that is needed or wanted. I didn't create that situation, ANET did. I know you don't like it but that's GW2 Warrior for you. And yes, it is boring. Thus we have come back to the original reason for the post. The optimal build for a warrior is to spam 100 blades in a 100% full Zerker glass cannon gear with a build that is meant to optimize 1 single ability.
A.Net did not create that situation. Players with limited imagination did - they go the quick and easy route, not the imaginative route. That is why you will see in Trinity-based games specific builds are only looked for - someone found it worked, posted it on the net and others use it. That is the same with the build you mention above. That was created by the players not the company.
No A.Net did not setup the situation but players do exploit with one build if they can get the 'gold ring' easily.
It's the optimal build. And yes, ANET created it, NOT the players. Players only discovered it. And it was not due to lazy, unimaginative players, it was in fact the opposite. It's called Theory Crafting. That's what players do, they go through and test all the different ways to do something and the end result was the above composition. I know it sucks, but it is what it is.
People don't like it because healing and tanking is hard, DPS is easy. So everyone is DPS (better at pvp too). So finding healers and tanks is hard, and the role of healer and tank can be stressful, especially with cocky DPS players on your back if anything goes wrong.
This is the problem with the trinity currently. They offloaded all of the difficulty on two roles and executes their gameplay in a somewhat boring fashion.
Rift tried to alleviate this by adding some off roles for each, but the end result was that healers had a difficult time, tanks had a frustrating time, and DPS just had to avoid agro and uber obvious telegraphed attacks while spamming the macro.
Its not an easy solution, which is why no ones done anything with it other than add complexity to tanks and healers. There needs to be a more fun way to approach healing and tanking. And hate to bring up rift again, Chloromancer mage was probably the most fun healing I had, despite it wasn't really viable for most situations keeping the tank alive (no direct heals if I recall just heals on damage aoe)
If they can figure out a way to make holding aggo entertaining and not a seriously hard task (usually its not but some disagree) and made healing less of a bitch role with a lot of pressure on your shoulders...then we would get somewhere.
The holy trininty unfortunately is vital to good group works and good group mechanics. The feeling of a well oiled machine running though difficult content because all members are great at their role and working together...that is what grouping is about and its the holy trinity that makes all efforts vital...adding to that great feeling of working as a group. Games that don't have the trinity don't have that feeling and its all meh.
Most people that prefer trinity because it's all they know. Maybe they tried a little gw2 which isn't a decent example of non-trinity at it's best. I myself welcome change I don't want to play the same mmo for the next 10yrs. Trinity becomes stale mostly because other then the tank you never really engage the mob, it doesn't threaten you doesn't even feel like a fight. I don't find one system better than the other but do find a non trinity game more immersive for each player in a group and disagree that it has a solo encounter feel or that people are running around aimlessly. I find it takes more group coordination than trinity, you don't have the blame game crap and mostly the same fight never goes the same way which is the nail in the coffin for trinity. Another cool group dynamic of non-trinity is the ability to try the same content with different mixture of classes in a group another way to mix up a run. If EQN pulls the "better AI" idea it will only improve.
Originally posted by spookydom Not against it and never will be. However I do feel it has been done to death, I like the way dev's are beginning to look at new ways for teams to play together in mmo's. If any genre of games needs a little innovation I feel it's the mmorpg. I support new ideas, if they don't work there is a solid foundation to go back to after all.
True.. the typical trinity which anymore is AOE taunt, Heals and AOE dps is boring as hell.. The trinity needs to be expanded so that other roles such as debuffing, CC and kiting are in play..
In total agreement. I don't think the trinity is broken at all, or boring. I just think developers should look back to the past for future improvement just as stated above, because that's all it is.
People who think the trinity is broken are likely those who have only played WoW, or newer games, since around 2008. Prior to that, Vanilla WoW, EQ, etc people did have to "cc" and kite and the job of aggro management was just as much the responsiblity of the healers and DPS as it was the tank. Gameplay was much more involved and dynamic then the zergfest it's turned into now.
Originally posted by spookydom Not against it and never will be. However I do feel it has been done to death, I like the way dev's are beginning to look at new ways for teams to play together in mmo's. If any genre of games needs a little innovation I feel it's the mmorpg. I support new ideas, if they don't work there is a solid foundation to go back to after all.
True.. the typical trinity which anymore is AOE taunt, Heals and AOE dps is boring as hell.. The trinity needs to be expanded so that other roles such as debuffing, CC and kiting are in play..
In total agreement. I don't think the trinity is broken at all, or boring. I just think developers should look back to the past for future improvement just as stated above, because that's all it is.
People who think the trinity is broken are likely those who have only played WoW, or newer games, since around 2008. Prior to that, Vanilla WoW, EQ, etc people did have to "cc" and kite and the job of aggro management was just as much the responsiblity of the healers and DPS as it was the tank. Gameplay was much more involved and dynamic then the zergfest it's turned into now.
An encounter in a non-trinity game isn't just about cc and kiting. I've read this allot and to me it usually reads someone who only has a sideline view of it. The most important dynamic and difference is that each class has the ability to dodge or block damage in real time. In a traditional trinity mmo incoming damage is a math stat in your gear and you're expected to take some giving the healers a role. Non trinity is more realistic you actually have to not get hit. First thing I notice when players come from a trinity mmo is that they don't move and try to tank not their fault it's a habit. Sure everybody in a non-trinity does dps but in different ways which is the reason you pick that class not because you're regular group needs it.
Originally posted by Waterlily I have played holy trinity for years and still love it. As a tank I depend on my healer and she depend on me, I trust my DPS to kill my mob and they trust me I hold aggro on it. I look for that trust, it's nice to know you can count on someone and they can count on you. I actually don't mind being so helpless on my own as a tank, I enjoy not being able to solo.
I like this response - and I agree with it. In games where holy trinities do not exist, it takes less of an approach on team play, and more on solo play. Sure, you are on a team, looking for the same goal - but you do not have to rely on anyone else.
So the fact that the devs say they want to focus on group play and have players rely on each other doesn't mean that they will? Doesn't make much sense to say that ... the devs want players to rely on each other.
When people talk about class balance someone always spouts something like "rock says... hmm scissors is OK, nerf paper". Being 'a tank' is like being forced to play rock paper scissors with rock every time. In a word dull.
There is nothing inherently wrong with the the trinity in and of itself (though the argument that there should be more roles like support, cc etc is compelling). The problem is forcing people into these pretty narrow, rigidly pre define roles every step of the way. Allowing characters to fairly simply select different roles and even gasp making hybrids effective is interesting to me. Lots of mechanics that have had a stranglehold back since EQ1 (with WoW sealing the deal) are finally being challenged and I think that is cause for celebration rather than concern.
You want to know why - I will tell you. PVPers. PVP players hate healers and pet healers (a dps being healed by a healer) even more. Notice that the games that are eliminating the trinity are all pvp-centric games (Tera, GW2, etc.).
I too am a healer when I can be though I level with my dps spec (if available).
This is another case of "pvp over all". My personal opinion is that developers have a bias toward pvp. You are not "uber" unless you pvp. In addition, more and more mmos are trying to look like console games (especially with combat) to pull in that audience. Most of the top console games have pvp capability and it is popular in console games.
What developers do not understand, or care about, or both is that there are quite a lot of players that like to heal and like to tank and like the trinity. However, there are a lot more dps only players so that is what the developers cater to.
it is simple, because they need to pick up a role like a task wich they then need to be good at and they suck in it so being whatever you want whenever you want without really pressure or so called skill ftw for them.
Holy trinity is a static combat tactic that is dull and boring.
Healer: press 1
Healer press 1
Healer press 1
Tank: press 1+2+3 to tank
Tank: press 1+2+3 to tank
Rest of the lot: DPS DPS DPS DPS
This is somewhat true, in my little bubble Ive tanked, healed and dps the hardest content in many mmos,. I think I'm a decent player. Yet in the 3 years I've played Vindictus I've watch youtube videos of gamers soloing bosses which required a full group or raid I couldn't dream of soloing, so in a sense it's takes more skill rather than gear.
2. Whatever else you can press until 100 blades is off cool down.
(number 2 is optional)
If that's how you played your warrior, no surprise you got bored in GW2... anyone would get bored if he limited himself to use only like 5% of a class potential.
I don't have a warrior. I had the Mesmer who used Time Warp so the 4 warriors could spam 100 blades faster. That was my job, That's why I was there. Sure I did respectable DPS on my own, but Time Warp is why it's 4 Warriors and a Mesmer instead of 5 warriors spamming 100 Blades.
I hate to break it to you, but that 5% of the class's potential ( as you have called it) is all that is needed or wanted. I didn't create that situation, ANET did. I know you don't like it but that's GW2 Warrior for you. And yes, it is boring. Thus we have come back to the original reason for the post. The optimal build for a warrior is to spam 100 blades in a 100% full Zerker glass cannon gear with a build that is meant to optimize 1 single ability.
A.Net did not create that situation. Players with limited imagination did - they go the quick and easy route, not the imaginative route. That is why you will see in Trinity-based games specific builds are only looked for - someone found it worked, posted it on the net and others use it. That is the same with the build you mention above. That was created by the players not the company.
No A.Net did not setup the situation but players do exploit with one build if they can get the 'gold ring' easily.
Nah a developer with poor imagination created that situation, the player just took advantage of it, as every developer knows will happen.
GW2's approach to the holy trinity was by far the most "low brow" approach. Heres innovation, lets just delete the damn roles and let everyone heal themselves ect. Boring.
The combat is far too simplistic, which is why the above scenario was not only viable (it should never be viable) but was also ideal (worse than just being viable)
They could have made the AI react to such spamming of moves, but they didn't. They could have added other layers and dimensions to combat to where the Mesmer buff was only ideal in some situations, but they didn't. They chose to more or less go the third person shooter route, life in defiance, where you just run around spamming stuff and if you die no big deal someone will bring you up and you can go back to spamming.
Its from a total lack of imagination that the solution to the self proclaimed "holy trinity problem" as ANET saw it to just delete the roles rather than modify and create a new system.
Deleting roles isn't innovating, its deleting roles. It was the easy way out, and with the simplistic combat makes for a bunch of people carelessly running around spamming their best attack and nothing else.
The developers need to create a reason to do other stuff or this happens, a good game would have developed some way to evolve the holy trinity and combat, an overhyped game bent on launch sales..well they just decided to go the easy route.
This is all why im very worried to see speech about EQN walking the line that GW2 took. It was the least innovative game ive seen in years, and boiled down to the lowest common denominator gamer who was looking for ease and accessibility above all else, the bane of modern mmorpgs.
I disagree. How can a developer see ALL permutations of a MOB situation? No I see it as a player imagination problem, being stuck wanting to play specific roles, and seeing none, decided to make roles. That is the issue. It has nothing to do with lack of imagination on A.Net's part.
Players, in general, are very unimaginative (and I count myself as one too). I can see you don't see that not having the trinity is a possible good thing. A good quot is what I will leave this discussion with -
Originally posted by spookydom Not against it and never will be. However I do feel it has been done to death, I like the way dev's are beginning to look at new ways for teams to play together in mmo's. If any genre of games needs a little innovation I feel it's the mmorpg. I support new ideas, if they don't work there is a solid foundation to go back to after all.
True.. the typical trinity which anymore is AOE taunt, Heals and AOE dps is boring as hell.. The trinity needs to be expanded so that other roles such as debuffing, CC and kiting are in play..
In total agreement. I don't think the trinity is broken at all, or boring. I just think developers should look back to the past for future improvement just as stated above, because that's all it is.
People who think the trinity is broken are likely those who have only played WoW, or newer games, since around 2008. Prior to that, Vanilla WoW, EQ, etc people did have to "cc" and kite and the job of aggro management was just as much the responsiblity of the healers and DPS as it was the tank. Gameplay was much more involved and dynamic then the zergfest it's turned into now.
There is just too much one sided views on the holy trinity WoW invented, simplified gameplay down to 3 roles aka holy trinity. Eq has way more than 3 roles and also many different tactics combining various roles, slowing, multitudes of cc, buffing and loads of support roles that all require good decision making from all roles. If a person only have experience with WoW and games after that period, or even only played Eq in a one sided way, I can understand that holy trinity is a bad word and anything trying to break that WoW trinity mold is welcomed.
Yes we need to break out of the WoW boxed way of thinking, but as GW2 proves it (atleast to me) roleless is dull as hell. The problem with hard defined roles has been getting a group with all the required roles present + those players need to play decently well (weakest link) + having the time and patience to bother with it - That is the problem that needs fixing, and it isnt fixed by removing the basics of mmorpg, playing a role.
I used to be against it, then I played GW2 and realized I missed it. Now I think it's a good thing to force people to specialize to give the game a bit of depth. I think the thing people dislike about the most is that it's not "fun" to be a tank or a healer, so there are very few of them making it harder to find groups.
I think we just need more games with "job" type systems like FF. Let's you specialize, but not be locked into it if you don't want to do that role all the time.
2. Whatever else you can press until 100 blades is off cool down.
(number 2 is optional)
If that's how you played your warrior, no surprise you got bored in GW2... anyone would get bored if he limited himself to use only like 5% of a class potential.
I don't have a warrior. I had the Mesmer who used Time Warp so the 4 warriors could spam 100 blades faster. That was my job, That's why I was there. Sure I did respectable DPS on my own, but Time Warp is why it's 4 Warriors and a Mesmer instead of 5 warriors spamming 100 Blades.
I hate to break it to you, but that 5% of the class's potential ( as you have called it) is all that is needed or wanted. I didn't create that situation, ANET did. I know you don't like it but that's GW2 Warrior for you. And yes, it is boring. Thus we have come back to the original reason for the post. The optimal build for a warrior is to spam 100 blades in a 100% full Zerker glass cannon gear with a build that is meant to optimize 1 single ability.
A.Net did not create that situation. Players with limited imagination did - they go the quick and easy route, not the imaginative route. That is why you will see in Trinity-based games specific builds are only looked for - someone found it worked, posted it on the net and others use it. That is the same with the build you mention above. That was created by the players not the company.
No A.Net did not setup the situation but players do exploit with one build if they can get the 'gold ring' easily.
Nah a developer with poor imagination created that situation, the player just took advantage of it, as every developer knows will happen.
GW2's approach to the holy trinity was by far the most "low brow" approach. Heres innovation, lets just delete the damn roles and let everyone heal themselves ect. Boring.
The combat is far too simplistic, which is why the above scenario was not only viable (it should never be viable) but was also ideal (worse than just being viable)
They could have made the AI react to such spamming of moves, but they didn't. They could have added other layers and dimensions to combat to where the Mesmer buff was only ideal in some situations, but they didn't. They chose to more or less go the third person shooter route, life in defiance, where you just run around spamming stuff and if you die no big deal someone will bring you up and you can go back to spamming.
Its from a total lack of imagination that the solution to the self proclaimed "holy trinity problem" as ANET saw it to just delete the roles rather than modify and create a new system.
Deleting roles isn't innovating, its deleting roles. It was the easy way out, and with the simplistic combat makes for a bunch of people carelessly running around spamming their best attack and nothing else.
The developers need to create a reason to do other stuff or this happens, a good game would have developed some way to evolve the holy trinity and combat, an overhyped game bent on launch sales..well they just decided to go the easy route.
This is all why im very worried to see speech about EQN walking the line that GW2 took. It was the least innovative game ive seen in years, and boiled down to the lowest common denominator gamer who was looking for ease and accessibility above all else, the bane of modern mmorpgs.
I disagree. How can a developer see ALL permutations of a MOB situation? No I see it as a player imagination problem, being stuck wanting to play specific roles, and seeing none, decided to make roles. That is the issue. It has nothing to do with lack of imagination on A.Net's part.
Players, in general, are very unimaginative (and I count myself as one too). I can see you don't see that not having the trinity is a possible good thing. A good quot is what I will leave this discussion with -
Most of the DPS in the game revolve around Berserker.
But, OK, lets get imaginative and different. I really did enjoy playing a thief in GW2. And no, not a back stab or even any Berserker gear at all for that matter. I went 100% condition build. My gear was full Rabid. Played this toon unlike a traditional thief. I really didn't use Stealth at all. My thief is quite surprising really, It really is a bitch to kill. But even then, I was still reduced to kiting mobs through Dodge traited to drop caltrops then death blossom whenever available. Very very effective PVE build. But still, not very deep or involved.
Comments
I'm just going to target the original question with a response and admit I skipped most of the thread...
*I* am not against the Trinity...
I do personally find it boring to watch mobs brainlessly beat on an aggro generator.... while at best the rest of us dance around mechanics that really make no sense. To the point that most raids resemble something more akin to a console port.. than an RPG. Which is where the real irony comes in as people make negative comments directed at EQN and related to consoles... I'm not talking about "don't stand in the fire" its just the mechanics that feel more like donkey kong as opposed to something I would read about in the Krynn novels and think of how it would "play out".
You want to have a good time take a character in WoW any level from 24 to say 79 into a battleground... (probably any level but those ranges are great examples). Then watch what happens when your team plays together.. or when its just a bunch of people camping GY's, the roads etc... Trinity doesn't solve player choice... and some players just choose to be bad or at a minimum not doing anything useful.
Oh wait you say that's PvP... the point is that the entire push in EQN is this Emergent AI. Everything SOE is trying to do with combat depends on it. So the real discussion is the fact that if the AI fails.. the combat fails... I use the PvP example because the mob isn't supposed to run to the tank and just beat on them. Its supposed to be more like going up against an intelligent enemy and the standard way that people group play... does not fit that model.
Adaptation of the way you play and the class you play (thus not iconic roles) is done to fit what SOE is pushing. So your healer or dps may need a bit different mechanic to survive and the tank has to play differently to peel mobs off them. If players decide to play brainlessly SOE can't fix that... but if anything the people who take the time to work together should end up doing better as usual.
I would also say as someone that was on the UO Interest team (Great Lakes Shard) ... I saw plenty of events that were mine or that I helped with... where players with "no trinity" had to work as a team to keep each other alive and progress the event. So team play can certainly exist in either game type... but again it comes down to what players choose to do and how they choose to play. Most successful group/raid play has more to do with not taking people who would not help... than the trinity design...
And the problem with the trinity, is that some believe that the baker should have the freedom of assigning himself wichever role he wants (within limits, if the baker makes it alone he'll make alot less bread) or if he has 3 baker friends, these baker friends choose wich new role they're going to take. There are still roles and you now have choice.
A.Net did not create that situation. Players with limited imagination did - they go the quick and easy route, not the imaginative route. That is why you will see in Trinity-based games specific builds are only looked for - someone found it worked, posted it on the net and others use it. That is the same with the build you mention above. That was created by the players not the company.
No A.Net did not setup the situation but players do exploit with one build if they can get the 'gold ring' easily.
You mean Each got a roll right?
Nah a developer with poor imagination created that situation, the player just took advantage of it, as every developer knows will happen.
GW2's approach to the holy trinity was by far the most "low brow" approach. Heres innovation, lets just delete the damn roles and let everyone heal themselves ect. Boring.
The combat is far too simplistic, which is why the above scenario was not only viable (it should never be viable) but was also ideal (worse than just being viable)
They could have made the AI react to such spamming of moves, but they didn't. They could have added other layers and dimensions to combat to where the Mesmer buff was only ideal in some situations, but they didn't. They chose to more or less go the third person shooter route, life in defiance, where you just run around spamming stuff and if you die no big deal someone will bring you up and you can go back to spamming.
Its from a total lack of imagination that the solution to the self proclaimed "holy trinity problem" as ANET saw it to just delete the roles rather than modify and create a new system.
Deleting roles isn't innovating, its deleting roles. It was the easy way out, and with the simplistic combat makes for a bunch of people carelessly running around spamming their best attack and nothing else.
The developers need to create a reason to do other stuff or this happens, a good game would have developed some way to evolve the holy trinity and combat, an overhyped game bent on launch sales..well they just decided to go the easy route.
This is all why im very worried to see speech about EQN walking the line that GW2 took. It was the least innovative game ive seen in years, and boiled down to the lowest common denominator gamer who was looking for ease and accessibility above all else, the bane of modern mmorpgs.
I'm for the trinity. But I do understand one reason why some people might not like it, boredom.
The reason that many people don't like the trinity is because of the implementation of the trinity in many games. Healers in EQ1 were notoriously boring to play, requiring the player to pay attention to the health of teammates, select a teammate in distress and cast an appropriate heal spell, all while balancing their mana pool against the perceived remaining duration of the fight. In raids, especially in the early days, it became a game of 'stand, cast complete heal on target, alert the next in the heal chain and sit until it's your turn again.. Basically, a single hot key did everything.
This occurred in many games. Healing wasn't particularly enjoyable. Waiting until told, then hitting a single hotkey. If the game allowed a macro to 'watch the heal channel and fire the hotkey', the entire operation could be completely automated to operate under normal circumstances. How is a role like that ever going to be interesting, or challenging.for the player?
Likewise, the various DPS classes role is simply to pick an appropriate spot to stand, turn on attack, and periodically hit the buttons to add additional damage. It is a little more engaging than the relatively static role of healer, but requires little from the player except to know when it might be safe to apply some additional damage. Ultimately, this role can be repetitive, and that repetition can lead to boredom.
Tanking is the one really active role in the trinity. They try to maintain the target's attention while absorbing the brunt of the target's attacks. But even this is frequently a series of wait for the ability to refresh, and push the button again. An advanced version of whack-a-mole, in effect.
The support roles, puller, crowd control, off-tank, kiter, supplimental heal, slower, etc., have moments where they are occupied, and less bored. However, the content frequently determines when their contributions are even necessary. Even the class design (binary abilities such as Slow) often don't stack, leaving many players with nothing to do. Trust me, being the 4th enchanter on a 72 man EQ1 raid isn't anything special as far as engaging game play goes. When their specialist function is satisfied, these roles revert to DPS, where they aren't particularly useful.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
It's the optimal build. And yes, ANET created it, NOT the players. Players only discovered it. And it was not due to lazy, unimaginative players, it was in fact the opposite. It's called Theory Crafting. That's what players do, they go through and test all the different ways to do something and the end result was the above composition. I know it sucks, but it is what it is.
People don't like it because healing and tanking is hard, DPS is easy. So everyone is DPS (better at pvp too). So finding healers and tanks is hard, and the role of healer and tank can be stressful, especially with cocky DPS players on your back if anything goes wrong.
This is the problem with the trinity currently. They offloaded all of the difficulty on two roles and executes their gameplay in a somewhat boring fashion.
Rift tried to alleviate this by adding some off roles for each, but the end result was that healers had a difficult time, tanks had a frustrating time, and DPS just had to avoid agro and uber obvious telegraphed attacks while spamming the macro.
Its not an easy solution, which is why no ones done anything with it other than add complexity to tanks and healers. There needs to be a more fun way to approach healing and tanking. And hate to bring up rift again, Chloromancer mage was probably the most fun healing I had, despite it wasn't really viable for most situations keeping the tank alive (no direct heals if I recall just heals on damage aoe)
If they can figure out a way to make holding aggo entertaining and not a seriously hard task (usually its not but some disagree) and made healing less of a bitch role with a lot of pressure on your shoulders...then we would get somewhere.
The holy trininty unfortunately is vital to good group works and good group mechanics. The feeling of a well oiled machine running though difficult content because all members are great at their role and working together...that is what grouping is about and its the holy trinity that makes all efforts vital...adding to that great feeling of working as a group. Games that don't have the trinity don't have that feeling and its all meh.
In total agreement. I don't think the trinity is broken at all, or boring. I just think developers should look back to the past for future improvement just as stated above, because that's all it is.
People who think the trinity is broken are likely those who have only played WoW, or newer games, since around 2008. Prior to that, Vanilla WoW, EQ, etc people did have to "cc" and kite and the job of aggro management was just as much the responsiblity of the healers and DPS as it was the tank. Gameplay was much more involved and dynamic then the zergfest it's turned into now.
More faster get party together.
in WoW u need wait 30-1 hour lfg queus becouse lack of tanks.
u play 4 dungeon run and spend over 2 hour in day for queu is NOT fun,cool,epic,interesting.
An encounter in a non-trinity game isn't just about cc and kiting. I've read this allot and to me it usually reads someone who only has a sideline view of it. The most important dynamic and difference is that each class has the ability to dodge or block damage in real time. In a traditional trinity mmo incoming damage is a math stat in your gear and you're expected to take some giving the healers a role. Non trinity is more realistic you actually have to not get hit. First thing I notice when players come from a trinity mmo is that they don't move and try to tank not their fault it's a habit. Sure everybody in a non-trinity does dps but in different ways which is the reason you pick that class not because you're regular group needs it.
So the fact that the devs say they want to focus on group play and have players rely on each other doesn't mean that they will? Doesn't make much sense to say that ... the devs want players to rely on each other.
When people talk about class balance someone always spouts something like "rock says... hmm scissors is OK, nerf paper". Being 'a tank' is like being forced to play rock paper scissors with rock every time. In a word dull.
There is nothing inherently wrong with the the trinity in and of itself (though the argument that there should be more roles like support, cc etc is compelling). The problem is forcing people into these pretty narrow, rigidly pre define roles every step of the way. Allowing characters to fairly simply select different roles and even gasp making hybrids effective is interesting to me. Lots of mechanics that have had a stranglehold back since EQ1 (with WoW sealing the deal) are finally being challenged and I think that is cause for celebration rather than concern.
You want to know why - I will tell you. PVPers. PVP players hate healers and pet healers (a dps being healed by a healer) even more. Notice that the games that are eliminating the trinity are all pvp-centric games (Tera, GW2, etc.).
I too am a healer when I can be though I level with my dps spec (if available).
This is another case of "pvp over all". My personal opinion is that developers have a bias toward pvp. You are not "uber" unless you pvp. In addition, more and more mmos are trying to look like console games (especially with combat) to pull in that audience. Most of the top console games have pvp capability and it is popular in console games.
What developers do not understand, or care about, or both is that there are quite a lot of players that like to heal and like to tank and like the trinity. However, there are a lot more dps only players so that is what the developers cater to.
This is somewhat true, in my little bubble Ive tanked, healed and dps the hardest content in many mmos,. I think I'm a decent player. Yet in the 3 years I've played Vindictus I've watch youtube videos of gamers soloing bosses which required a full group or raid I couldn't dream of soloing, so in a sense it's takes more skill rather than gear.
I disagree. How can a developer see ALL permutations of a MOB situation? No I see it as a player imagination problem, being stuck wanting to play specific roles, and seeing none, decided to make roles. That is the issue. It has nothing to do with lack of imagination on A.Net's part.
Players, in general, are very unimaginative (and I count myself as one too). I can see you don't see that not having the trinity is a possible good thing. A good quot is what I will leave this discussion with -
"When we are no longer able to change a situation - we are challenged to change ourselves." - Viktor E. Frankl
Because I've played the trinity in one game, then the next, then the next, then the next, then the next, then the next, then the next, then the next.
They're still cranking them out too, so I really don't think it's a problem that only 90% of MMOs have it now instead of 99%
oh yes please lets do 10 years of crappy action combat games wich hold your intrest for a maximum of 2 months.
There is just too much one sided views on the holy trinity WoW invented, simplified gameplay down to 3 roles aka holy trinity. Eq has way more than 3 roles and also many different tactics combining various roles, slowing, multitudes of cc, buffing and loads of support roles that all require good decision making from all roles. If a person only have experience with WoW and games after that period, or even only played Eq in a one sided way, I can understand that holy trinity is a bad word and anything trying to break that WoW trinity mold is welcomed.
Yes we need to break out of the WoW boxed way of thinking, but as GW2 proves it (atleast to me) roleless is dull as hell. The problem with hard defined roles has been getting a group with all the required roles present + those players need to play decently well (weakest link) + having the time and patience to bother with it - That is the problem that needs fixing, and it isnt fixed by removing the basics of mmorpg, playing a role.
"I am my connectome" https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HA7GwKXfJB0
I used to be against it, then I played GW2 and realized I missed it. Now I think it's a good thing to force people to specialize to give the game a bit of depth. I think the thing people dislike about the most is that it's not "fun" to be a tank or a healer, so there are very few of them making it harder to find groups.
I think we just need more games with "job" type systems like FF. Let's you specialize, but not be locked into it if you don't want to do that role all the time.
Most of the DPS in the game revolve around Berserker.
But, OK, lets get imaginative and different. I really did enjoy playing a thief in GW2. And no, not a back stab or even any Berserker gear at all for that matter. I went 100% condition build. My gear was full Rabid. Played this toon unlike a traditional thief. I really didn't use Stealth at all. My thief is quite surprising really, It really is a bitch to kill. But even then, I was still reduced to kiting mobs through Dodge traited to drop caltrops then death blossom whenever available. Very very effective PVE build. But still, not very deep or involved.