As far as a tank hitting taunt making sense, tank standing still, and healer standing in the back, if you hadn't cut out 90% of my post and responded to one line, you would see that I addressed that. I clearly said that I don't need it to be classical trinity or really anything similar. I said that I just don't want it to be the DPS only meta that GW2 has going on. I am all for combat systems that are a lot more engaging, fun, and realistic. It is more of a preference for something that goes beyond full DPS meta, than a preference for a classical Trinity system.
I wanted to add to this part.. It amazes me how those that are anti-trinity become so focused on their position, they end up being just as blind as those that are trinity fanbois.. Lets address the poster excuse why trinity is bad.. All I hear from Georgie Peorgie and others is, "a mob would not just sit being taunted by the tank while the healer gets no attention". Well here we go.. If you are 1 of a few mobs being ganged up by 5 players.. It's obvious the man with the shield bashing your nose in, is the tank. Now as for the other 4 members of the group.. One of them wearing cloth, two of them wearing leather, and the fourth wearing chain, ALL of them waving their arms saying some unknown words.. Which one is the healer? Is there some magical icon over their heads pointing to them? Using WoW classes as the example.. That cloth class could be healing priest, or maybe a dps priest.. maybe not a priest at all.. As for the leather classes, maybe they are both druids, but one is a healing druid and the other is a dps druid, or even better, maybe both are healing druids, then what? Chain class would be any spec of Shaman.. So there is NO WAY a mob that is being smashed by a shield and cut by a sword knows WHERE those heals are coming from.. Get the idea yet?
Now I"m all for cleaning up the trinity, and making it more realistic, but I"m definitely against scrapping it all together and end up with some DPS meta game, where everyone is basically DPS, with only minor skills in everything else.. Now as for the cleaning up the trinity.. There should be a threat meter.. Some magical number in code needs to tell that mob WHO he hates most.. Is it the man with the shield bashing his face?, or the man standing in the distance with a bow, while arrows are hitting him in the butt? OR does the mob just loathe a certain race for no reason.. It has to be a physical explanation, and healing isn't one of them.. Maybe the healing role itself needs to be tweaked.. Make it more visual, and something that can be interrupted? But once it's interrupted, the mob goes back to fighting the closest man that is bashing his nose?
GW2 feels more like everyone is 80-90% DPS and the rest is other stuff.. I would like to keep the ROLE combat more prominent and variable.. I don't want to go back to the days that a role is GIMPED from solo play like a rogue or warrior was in EQ, but there has to be a better alternative.. I enjoyed the variety of roles that players brought to the group.. First, increase group size to minimum of 6.. Bring back those lost skills like Feign Death, CC, Buff, and Debuff.. As a percentage I would like to see the characters maybe be 40-50% DPS, so that they can SOLO any trash mob in the game.. and the rest would be class role defining skills and abilities as mentioned.. In addition and in conclusion, there should be NO BALANCE in classes when it comes to PvP play.. That too has a negative effect on why devs resort to DPS meta classes.. It's easier to balance by the numbers.. So I can only assume that EQN is going to promote balanced PvP.. Grrrrrrr
I really enjoyed the combat and gameplay of GW2 but it had such awful design choices in terms of progression and daily/monthly BS that I just couldn't keep playing it.
Wildstar/ESO/Archeage are new MMORPGs that are going to offer the "trinity" of sorts so keep an eye out for those if that's your cookie.
The "Holy Trinity" role system was designed and implemented before WoW. True, it's been around as long as I have been alive.. When I played AD&D in the 70's we made sure someone in our group had heals.. lol and we always enjoyed a "meat shield"..
What I still don't understand is why these devs would rather dump mechanics that work, instead of fixing the image problem tanks and heals have, instead. If devs continue to concentrate on combat so much, the result IS players rallying around what was designed, instead of the pain of choosing more responsible roles (DPS dies who cares? Tank or healer dies the group can wipe). This I can agree with.. IMO the role system is not evil, it's just that the devs created and allowed for a good system (trinity) to evolve and mutate into something that is broken. No one cares if dps dies, but if the healer or tank goes down, everyone dies.. How did this occur and why? My guess is the taunt mechanics.. Back in the day of EQ and AD&D, you didn't need a special "taunting" spec'd class. All you needed was someone in PLATE that was a meat shield.. Even a chain wearing class could off tank if needed.. The same bad habit effected EQ, and polluted WoW as well.. I remember after the PoP expansion in EQ, groups would ONLY accept Clerics, while Druids and Shamans were shown the door..
The tank and healer shortage is due to their leadership roles (as WoW players call "responsible roles") and the pressure of those two roles offer. If the pressure was more even, players could switch between them more easily, and the shortages can be less (especially if Tank and healers can do more than just tank and heal -- in WoW healers are raid monitors [as their addons keep them informed], which is something devs can offer healers to do than just be a healbot. Like doing callouts for incoming and positioning). Agreed,, however, I'm not comfortable in having all classes turning into DPS meta classes like what GW2 did.. There has to be a happy middle here, and I think we the players can talk about where that middle is.. Too many classes in EQ were unable to SOLO because of bad design, GW2 everyone can SOLO, even the dead because of bad design..
IMO, I would like to see classes be more like EQ's Druid and Shaman's for example.. Both of them could solo just about anything in the game.. And in a group environment, both were welcomed.. I as a druid could toss out heals as the main healer, but I always did snaring, and even toss in a DOT as well.. I had DD spells, but didn't want to overcook the mobs and waste mana.. So I could CC, Solo, Heal and DPS if need.. Personally I wish combat was slower, so DOTS were more effective in combat.. EQ had some amazing classes with versatility such as the Bard.. That is what I'm talking about.. Bring back classes that are capable of soloing, yet have class defining skills and abilities that make them special.. BUT NEVER required..
Agreed,, however, I'm not comfortable in having all classes turning into DPS meta classes like what GW2 did.. There has to be a happy middle here, and I think we the players can talk about where that middle is.. Too many classes in EQ were unable to SOLO because of bad design, GW2 everyone can SOLO, even the dead because of bad design..
IMO, I would like to see classes be more like EQ's Druid and Shaman's for example.. Both of them could solo just about anything in the game.. And in a group environment, both were welcomed.. I as a druid could toss out heals as the main healer, but I always did snaring, and even toss in a DOT as well.. I had DD spells, but didn't want to overcook the mobs and waste mana.. So I could CC, Solo, Heal and DPS if need.. Personally I wish combat was slower, so DOTS were more effective in combat.. EQ had some amazing classes with versatility such as the Bard.. That is what I'm talking about.. Bring back classes that are capable of soloing, yet have class defining skills and abilities that make them special.. BUT NEVER required..
That statement is pretty much why I'm confused that anyone thinks EQN is following GW2. The game is fundamentally flawed or not depending how you look at it. To me GW2 is a PVP game, PVE is a time-sink. Self-Rez is one of the most OP skills in other games where it is usually only a class or two and requires some effort. Having every class do it easily is over the top.
Druid/Shaman are pretty much what I expect out of EQN. Roles with sub roles. Not exactly "hybrids" or "Jack of all trades" but classes that have options within their little area of use.
I too wish DOTs would make a come back and am hoping with 40+ classes that some go that path. A long with them, I hope there are encounters where DOTs are the way to go and actually have a use instead of instant cast everything. And not just mobs with huge HP pools that need to be ticked down, but mechanics/strategy that DOTs counter and work against to actually make it exciting.
I wanted to add to this part.. It amazes me how those that are anti-trinity become so focused on their position, they end up being just as blind as those that are trinity fanbois.. Lets address the poster excuse why trinity is bad.. All I hear from Georgie Peorgie and others is, "a mob would not just sit being taunted by the tank while the healer gets no attention". Well here we go.. If you are 1 of a few mobs being ganged up by 5 players.. It's obvious the man with the shield bashing your nose in, is the tank. Now as for the other 4 members of the group.. One of them wearing cloth, two of them wearing leather, and the fourth wearing chain, ALL of them waving their arms saying some unknown words.. Which one is the healer? Is there some magical icon over their heads pointing to them? Using WoW classes as the example.. That cloth class could be healing priest, or maybe a dps priest.. maybe not a priest at all.. As for the leather classes, maybe they are both druids, but one is a healing druid and the other is a dps druid, or even better, maybe both are healing druids, then what? Chain class would be any spec of Shaman.. So there is NO WAY a mob that is being smashed by a shield and cut by a sword knows WHERE those heals are coming from.. Get the idea yet?
As they've said mobs will have classes-roles-abilities similar to players and that we can tell who is what, I'm assuming the usual visual ques will be present. But unlike most games, I'm assuming that mobs will be able to tell which player is doing what as well. Might not be the best "reality" feature, but neither is someone spamming taunt making a mob angry.
Now I"m all for cleaning up the trinity, and making it more realistic, but I"m definitely against scrapping it all together and end up with some DPS meta game, where everyone is basically DPS, with only minor skills in everything else.. Now as for the cleaning up the trinity.. There should be a threat meter.. Some magical number in code needs to tell that mob WHO he hates most.. Is it the man with the shield bashing his face?, or the man standing in the distance with a bow, while arrows are hitting him in the butt? OR does the mob just loathe a certain race for no reason.. It has to be a physical explanation, and healing isn't one of them.. Maybe the healing role itself needs to be tweaked.. Make it more visual, and something that can be interrupted? But once it's interrupted, the mob goes back to fighting the closest man that is bashing his nose?
I don't know how PVE could work without a "threat meter" that doesn't turn into tag or ping pong. Like your examples though, I'm assuming they are going for less dependence on a numerical indicator that a UI Mod can easily track and then feed to a huge group of players. It should be different depending on the mobs likes-dislikes-weakness-strength, etc. Maybe a mob has a shield, a guy whacking at it with a mace probably isn't doing much, while the ranger shooting it in the rear is probably going to piss it off. At the same time, if a mob is whacking the crap out of me and then I'm instantly healed to full, it is probably going to take a look around and see who did it.
Where it can get interesting is what if the mob with the shield tells his caster buddy to throw up a ice wall behind them to block the ranger and then calls for a heal from their shaman? Now there is mob/AI team work and things get crazy. This is what I'm expecting from Storybricks, I could be reaching, but I hope not.
GW2 feels more like everyone is 80-90% DPS and the rest is other stuff.. I would like to keep the ROLE combat more prominent and variable.. I don't want to go back to the days that a role is GIMPED from solo play like a rogue or warrior was in EQ, but there has to be a better alternative.. I enjoyed the variety of roles that players brought to the group.. First, increase group size to minimum of 6.. Bring back those lost skills like Feign Death, CC, Buff, and Debuff.. As a percentage I would like to see the characters maybe be 40-50% DPS, so that they can SOLO any trash mob in the game.. and the rest would be class role defining skills and abilities as mentioned.. In addition and in conclusion, there should be NO BALANCE in classes when it comes to PvP play.. That too has a negative effect on why devs resort to DPS meta classes.. It's easier to balance by the numbers.. So I can only assume that EQN is going to promote balanced PvP.. Grrrrrrr
I'm right with you. PVP should have no balance. With multi-classing, it isn't needed. Doesn't mean their should be super powered FOTM builds dominating everyone, but an Anti-Mage should be just that, along with all the weakness to other classes. Someone messing you up, counter it, simple. Assuming of course that is isn't easy to slap together a build that 1-shots people.
With 8 abilities class locked, I'd guess that 5 or so are DPS and 3 are "class defining", like summon pets, big heals, stealth, etc. What people think of when X class is mentioned. The other 4 slots are home to less popular abilities that could fit into other classes. So while a Warrior probably shouldn't have a huge heal, a small hot or dmg shield could be okay.
MOBAs (which SOE uses to compare) are an easy way to see where they are going. Classes have even fewer abilities/items then EQN, yet still have options. Simply replacing 1 class for another can have a big impact on the team and it's synergy. Certain items or just how one plays the class can also make a big difference.
Watching pro matches and how they take forever to select their team because each enemy pick is something they have to think over. Can't just pick DPS DPS DPS WIN. There is strategy needed.
Roles are still there, but are flexible within the team's make up. If everyone just DPS or Offense or Defense, usually there is trouble. People have to be able to go in and out of various roles on the fly. It isn't locked down (Trinity) where you just do the same thing over and over forever.
While I'm doubting EQN will carbon copy MOBA mechanics, after playing them myself, I've grown to see the connection and how it can work much better then either the trinity or pure dps. A big part of it is the enemy. Either hard bots or players totally change the dynamic vs stupid trinity AI.
It is chaotic, but there are still patterns and strategies within the chaos that become familiar. A map might only have 10 popular methods of winning, but 10 is much better then 1-2. Hopefully EQN makes it even greater. No matter what, with enough time, players will get the hang of things and "best methods" will emerge. Hopefully SOE can continue to tweak the mechanics so there are still surprises waiting.
I see this major push lately for High Advanced AI for NPC.
but if the NPC get too advanced wouldn't they function like a real human?
in other words, PLAYER VS PLAYER,,,,,,,?
but I was under the impression that PvErs don't like a heavy dose of PvP in their face all the time.
but advanced AI that mimics actual intelligence would be just that same thing. Constant PvP.
So why do you want that?
Sorry, didn't read the whole thing, but for me "advanced AI" is not PVP.
Who doesn't want a challenge? Better AI allows for a wide range of possibilities. A rat doesn't need to know how to counter my fireball, but a Dragon probably can. Where as most games, a dragon and a rat usually only differ by a few million health and a couple abilities.
While I don't consider myself a PVEr, they usually seem concerned with being ganked, camped, harassed, and overall just don't like their day being crapped on by others for no reason.
Mobs can't gather on forums or talk crap in chat. Sure they can pop out of the bushes and kill me while I'm resting, but they aren't hopefully going to send /tells about my mom, continue to follow me around and wait until I'm weak from another mob fight, or run around a zone with 10 friends doing 10 vs 1 fights.
If AI was so smart that I couldn't tell who was a player or mob, I would be delighted, then again I love PVP. But it wouldn't be possible, because there is a lot more to it the "difficulty". A lot of the negatives of PVP come from human's being jerks to one another, usually without cause.
The AI has bee there all along I used to play reaper bots for country championship practice in Quake TDM/CTF and if I set their AI setting high enough I couldn't beat them. Trinity exists as its a better option than what the anti tank/heals brigade want and that is DUMB AI. If an NPC was programmed with the smartest AI the only way you would defeat it would be thru zerging i.e either thru bringing a lot of players to sacrifice or being able to constantly resurrect. Because that is a mess what you then ask for is NPC's with some DUMB AI so you can beat it. I'd rather trinity over DUMB AI just so dps players can have shorter queues and falsely think they are defeating anything but a zerg.
Improving incentives to tank would be a great start but just like the shop floor workers who cry foul that the manager gets more money than them they do the same to tanks/heals and prevent games moving forward. The supply demand for roles/skills needs to work in game as it does in life that's the age old problem of MMO's.
As far as "boring" goes you have three choices. Smart AI zergfest, dumb AI zergefest and trinity. I'd take trinity every time.
I think you are really limiting the options.
Many games have god-mode bots that instant head-shot, can hear/see everything, and basically are unrealistically difficult.
That isn't what they are going for.
Storybricks which controls the AI is all about making "realistic" AI, obviously within limits, no Skynet yet. Mobs would have likes-dislikes-weaknesses-strengths. Not god-mode AI. Mobs and Players would be able to react and counter one another in some form of realism. Each trying to exploit the other and win. Some mobs could be extra tough, but hopefully not to the extreme of needing 1000 people to kill 1 rat because it is a laser shooting super ninja rat.
They themselves have said that the tough AI has been around for a long time, but it wasn't possible to implement it in a way that wouldn't be so hard that players would give up. They've claimed to be able to balance it out and this is what is supposed to be the foundation of EQN's AI, PVE, combat, world.
I've said it before, but they are making some pretty wild claims. If they fall short, there really isn't much backpedaling for them to do. Either they were bending the truth and trying to hype it up way too much or are spot on and the game will be great.
You typed a lot. Going to try to respond point by point.
Sorry I can't help it. I usually even cut back what I type....I cry on the inside when I do.
This thread is over 30 pages long, so I am not going to dig up all of the posts for you. However, if you go look through them, you'll see a few people that claim that GW2's system is more challenging than trinity. Those people are who I was referring to.
Guess I assumed you were talking about those of us against the trinity in general. Any GW2 DPS fans are hopefully a small minority as I think that system is terrible for PVE. Works for the most part in PVP though.
It is more about stating preferences as to what should be incorporated into EQN's combat system than being stuck on gw2 = EQN or thinking that it has to be some kind of clone. The most successful/popular active, non-trinity combat MMO currently on the market is GW2. The most successful/popular Trinity MMO on the market is currently WoW. Developers may copy some features from those games or none, but obviously, anyone developing an MMO is going to be looking at what is working and what isn't working in the current market. Therefore, it makes sense to make the comparison and state preferences as to what should or shouldn't be adopted from the current popular MMOs on the market.
You are right, devs obviously look at the competition. BUT SOE has gone out of the way to say they do not want to be like GW2, from the role-less classes to the horrid PVE. GW2 is the most popular mmorpg with non-trinity combat, but MOBAs far outnumber all mmorpgs combined and are what SOE has directly compared their combat too.
I guess I don't understand why most simply overlook this. SOE says "No GW2" "Yes MOBA", yet all we talk about is GW2. I get there are similarities but they seem very superficial.
Like I said, without SOE throwing out the majority of what they have revealed, a system like GW2's isn't possible in EQN. No matter how similar the actual combat is or isn't. The game as a whole wouldn't allow it. You can't take 1 piece of one puzzle and make it fit in another puzzle, even if they are identical. The puzzle is going to look screwy.
Some like to dismiss the "emergent AI" and other elements, but if we dismiss what we've been told, discussion is pointless. We have to look at all of the ingredients to understand what they will combine to make. I can't really argue with logic that goes "Emergent AI isn't possible, therefore GW2 zerg dps combat it is!" It is true that the AI could be crap and just hype, but until we know more, I'm assuming it is good and the combat will follow.
As far as a tank hitting taunt making sense, tank standing still, and healer standing in the back, if you hadn't cut out 90% of my post and responded to one line, you would see that I addressed that. I clearly said that I don't need it to be classical trinity or really anything similar. I said that I just don't want it to be the DPS only meta that GW2 has going on. I am all for combat systems that are a lot more engaging, fun, and realistic. It is more of a preference for something that goes beyond full DPS meta, than a preference for a classical Trinity system.
I get you. To me, this is exactly what they are going for. I see the trinity, GW2's system, and EQN's all running a long side one another. Might have a few branches connecting them here and there, but overall, they are all distinct systems. I'm assuming EQN's combat will have a little trinity, a little dps fest, little zerg, little MOBA action, etc. When a game limits itself to one way, it has instantly limited it's replay value. Without diversity, people get bored and move on (stopping to complain on the way out of course).
Sorry, I think my previous response was more towards the person you were agreeing with. Their comment about SOE "banking" on DPS meta type games seems so wrong to me with what they've shown so far. Guess I'm just bored waiting for news of any kind for EQN (Landmark is okay for the time being) and have read too much about EQN and I either assume others don't know as much as I or totally throw it out the window and come to some odd conclusions. Or of course, I'm just letting my imagination get the best of me. Go go hype train!
with 40 playable classes I don't think anyone needs to worry about a lack of functionality with their character skill builds... sad that this thread has gotten so long and people still cant quite grasp the idea that the roles of tank, dps and healer will still be present in the game just not in the same manner as WoW, EQ2 or any of the other theme parks currently live.
think of group dynamics in ultima online if you want to know what grouping will more than likely resemble in EQN.
It is 2 am in real life and the server is rather empty. I find a couple people to group with but neither are tanks or healers. They are by default utility players. I am DPS. One of the people has unlock the warrior class and has somewhat decent armor and weapon to go with it. The other has unlocked the cleric but only has a couple healing skills. I switch to ranger to provide cover and be able to move around to maintain line of sight. We happily go hunting for that group that actually needs the trinity to defeat.
With the old system: Shout "any tanks lvl 22-26 willing to group" ... still shouting 45 minutes later "come on isn't there just 1 tank that can group for the 15 minutes I have left?"
with 40 playable classes I don't think anyone needs to worry about a lack of functionality with their character skill builds... sad that this thread has gotten so long and people still cant quite grasp the idea that the roles of tank, dps and healer will still be present in the game just not in the same manner as WoW, EQ2 or any of the other theme parks currently live.
think of group dynamics in ultima online if you want to know what grouping will more than likely resemble in EQN.
You might want to wait till you actually SEE the classes and what skills/spells they will have.. I would almost bet most of the abilities will be very homogenized to work the same as many others.. Sure you just unlocked pyromancer class that gives you a firebolt spells that you can swap out with your frost bolt spells.. Guess, what? They are both single target DD spells causing 100 pts of damage.. One comes with red graphics, the other comes with blue graphics.. Get the idea? Lets not overhype or imagine what you want.. Lets see what is actually SERVED..
As much as SoE says this is not GW2 and they have something different. From the moment they said this game does not have a hard trinity its all we have seen and the threads dont stop on this topic and they wont till we get details. I personally wish they had said nothing till they had info to back up the fact this game will be different in what way?!?!?!? As I have said before, I will give SoE a measure of trust because they are SoE but I doubt will have something that wont turn EQN into a zerg game like GW2 but I will be happy if I am wrong
I'm right with you. PVP should have no balance. With multi-classing, it isn't needed. Doesn't mean their should be super powered FOTM builds dominating everyone, but an Anti-Mage should be just that, along with all the weakness to other classes. Someone messing you up, counter it, simple. Assuming of course that is isn't easy to slap together a build that 1-shots people. It appears EQN wants to go down that MOBA PvP path, and that is all about balance with no regard to PvE fun and variety..
With 8 abilities class locked, I'd guess that 5 or so are DPS and 3 are "class defining", like summon pets, big heals, stealth, etc. ( no offense: but this tells me you didn't read and listen to that the devs talked about.. It isnt' that easy or fun.. Each class is limited and restricted to what they can and no not do.. Such as your example, a Rouge for example can NOT load up on ALL DPS fun, and toss in other stuff of his free will.. What people think of when X class is mentioned. The other 4 slots are home to less popular abilities that could fit into other classes. So while a Warrior probably shouldn't have a huge heal, a small hot or dmg shield could be okay.Also every skill or ability cost points to use, and the bigger the skill the more it cost.. Some gear and items will give you some flexibility in this, but you will still be limited to what and how often you can use skills..
MOBAs (which SOE uses to compare) are an easy way to see where they are going. Classes have even fewer abilities/items then EQN, yet still have options. Simply replacing 1 class for another can have a big impact on the team and it's synergy. Certain items or just how one plays the class can also make a big difference. I seriously doubt that EQN will give people the ability to switch classes and skill slots on the fly.. and SURE as hell NOT in combat..
Watching pro matches and how they take forever to select their team because each enemy pick is something they have to think over. Can't just pick DPS DPS DPS WIN. There is strategy needed. This frightens me.. If SOE thinks that they are going to grab ALL of LoL customers, without alienating the traditional MMORPG fans, good luck on that.. I think SOE is trying to marry MOBA to MMORPG, and I don't see that offspring being very pretty..
Roles are still there, but are flexible within the team's make up. If everyone just DPS or Offense or Defense, usually there is trouble. People have to be able to go in and out of various roles on the fly. It isn't locked down (Trinity) where you just do the same thing over and over forever. Personally I think most classes and characters will just be homogenized clones of each other (75%) and the other 25% will be unique perks that are fun, but nothing that will be OP, or defining in combat..
While I'm doubting EQN will carbon copy MOBA mechanics, after playing them myself, I've grown to see the connection and how it can work much better then either the trinity or pure dps. A big part of it is the enemy. Either hard bots or players totally change the dynamic vs stupid trinity AI.
It is chaotic, but there are still patterns and strategies within the chaos that become familiar. A map might only have 10 popular methods of winning, but 10 is much better then 1-2. Hopefully EQN makes it even greater. No matter what, with enough time, players will get the hang of things and "best methods" will emerge. Hopefully SOE can continue to tweak the mechanics so there are still surprises waiting.
Keep in mind.. YOU are looking at EQN as being GROUP VS GROUP(mobs) combat and I doubt that will be the case.. Most people will solo and in that case it doesn't matter what the AI is, smart or dumb, the mob(s) only have ONE target to fight against.. So.. that being the case.. Assuming 90% of MMO players are going into the world soloing, how many mobs will be solo or in groups? Smart or dumb solo mob is GOING to die, regardless who is tank or healer.. But if you assume that most combat will be small groups like in GW2.. Then the solo player MUST have overpowering advantage to survive a 2 or 3 on 1 fight.. If that holds trues.. then 2 or 3 players will go thru that same mob group like a hot knife thru butter, just like in GW2 and SWTOR..
I get the feeling you think that EQN open world combat will be mostly 3v3 combat where the mobs are equally strong as the players.. NOT GONNA TO HAPPEN.. Lets wait and see what the average mob encounter is..
And you seem to be assuming that the game will be tailored towards the solo player and not towards parties or having a balanced variety of content. If soloing is the future of MMOs as you seem to think it is then my mmo days may be coming to an end.
Well, GW2 didn't do the no trinity combat system well at all, at least in my opinion anyway. That being said, the trinity is old, outdated, and nothing more than a lazy developers dream. It was developed because technology wouldn't support intelligent AI but now it "should" be doable. Besides, real combat is chaos and why in god's green earth would you attack a big armored buffoon that couldn't kill a swamp rat by himself over a leather wearing back stabber that could one shot you or a dress and pointy hat wearing caster that could nuke your ass before you turned your attention to the guy insulting your momma? You wouldn't so why do support that kind of system? It's because it's easy, convenient, and that's the way we've always done it.
All that being said, you don't like the direction $OE is going? No worries, no one likes every game. Wait for something more your style or play something that's a better fit.
Just plain rubbish.
The AI has bee there all along I used to play reaper bots for country championship practice in Quake TDM/CTF and if I set their AI setting high enough I couldn't beat them. Trinity exists as its a better option than what the anti tank/heals brigade want and that is DUMB AI. If an NPC was programmed with the smartest AI the only way you would defeat it would be thru zerging i.e either thru bringing a lot of players to sacrifice or being able to constantly resurrect. Because that is a mess what you then ask for is NPC's with some DUMB AI so you can beat it. I'd rather trinity over DUMB AI just so dps players can have shorter queues and falsely think they are defeating anything but a zerg.
Improving incentives to tank would be a great start but just like the shop floor workers who cry foul that the manager gets more money than them they do the same to tanks/heals and prevent games moving forward. The supply demand for roles/skills needs to work in game as it does in life that's the age old problem of MMO's.
As far as "boring" goes you have three choices. Smart AI zergfest, dumb AI zergefest and trinity. I'd take trinity every time.
Sorry, but no. Quake AI was not advanced. It got neither an advanced AI behavoir nor advanced combat tactics. The Quake AI could beat you, because Quake was a aiming game.. and when your AI hits every time from almost every fucking position(like a AimBot) it seems to be advanced... but beside of perfect aim, and perfect reaction(dodge exactly when you fire at him) it wasn't advanced. MMO combat is completely different, you do not have a lot of twitch requirements, you don't aim anything(and if you have aim your hitzone is as bis as that it is almost impossible not to hit), but you do have different abilities, you do have different classes/roles, and you do have teamwork.
On the other side Storybricks does not offer super clever AI, it does offer more realistic behaivor.. and one point of that is, that it may sometimes don't do the perfect decision, but rather a not so good decision.. exactly as we humans do it. And therefore it may become a lot more unpredictable, and a lot more interesting, a lot more as you would fight against real humans with all their weakness, but also there posibilities to react differently to different situations.. and not like the usual AI always the same.
And because of that ideally a PvE group encounter may look a lot more like a pvp match, where both parties(Players and AI) react to the decisions of the other one, and more importantly don't react always the same.. the combat may feel fresh every time(hopefully).
And again.. as i and other already said no trinity does not mean no different roles and no teamwork. And even the devs said it.. it is not GW2.
I really hope they do include trinity and strategy into EQN. I have almost lost interest in the game if it becomes a DPS meta only type game, as those get really boring really fast for the most part.
I have appealed to SoE on the forums to not make the same mistake a few other newer MMO's have made by not including thought process into their combat. No, the trinity system isn't perfect, but it's a heck of a lot better than stacking DPS and snoozing through every fight in the game.
They want to bank on the success of other games that have done this, and it's plainly just not a good idea. It's one of the reasons why half the servers are dead in GW2, when you create a DPS only meta game, only 1 or 2 classes end up being desired because of an inability to perfectly balance DPS across all classes. It's a huge design mistake that has done nothing but hurt newer releases.
Just my opinion though, it may be a huge success if they nail it, balance wise.
This describes my feelings perfectly. I am not necessarily a Trinity fan. Instead, I am a DPS Meta only enemy. EQN doesn't necessarily have to use classical WoW Trinity to satisfy me or anything even similar to it, but I definitely want something that diverges from the DPS Meta only thing that GW2 has going on. It needs to be something to brings strategy back into combat. It's why I only play WvW. I cannot tolerate going into the Zerker Faceroll fest that GW2 PVE is.
The "Holy Trinity" role system was designed and implemented before WoW.
What I still don't understand is why these devs would rather dump mechanics that work, instead of fixing the image problem tanks and heals have, instead. If devs continue to concentrate on combat so much, the result IS players rallying around what was designed, instead of the pain of choosing more responsible roles (DPS dies who cares? Tank or healer dies the group can wipe).
The tank and healer shortage is due to their leadership roles (as WoW players call "responsible roles") and the pressure of those two roles offer. If the pressure was more even, players could switch between them more easily, and the shortages can be less (especially if Tank and healers can do more than just tank and heal -- in WoW healers are raid monitors [as their addons keep them informed], which is something devs can offer healers to do than just be a healbot. Like doing callouts for incoming and positioning).
Hi,
I did not say that WoW designed Trinity. It doesn't matter who originally came up with the concept. WoW is the most successful and well-known MMO that uses Trinity. Given it's success and longevity, It is more likely that new MMO developers will be comparing and contrasting what they want to do to WoW.
I honestly don't have an issue with dumping "mechanics that work" if there is a better alternative. If "mechanics that work" were not occasionally dumped or improved upon, we wouldn't even have gaming at all. My only issue is coming up with a worse alternative just to be different. I'd say just go with Trinity if the best alternative you can come up with is a Faceroll Easymode DPS fest like GW2, but I am definitely open to new systems that are actually better than Trinity.
The issue with trinity has nothing to do with mage. People are just tired of it. That means that any new MMO using Trinity needs to modify or tweak it to be unique, or scrap it and come up with something new.
I'm right with you. PVP should have no balance. With multi-classing, it isn't needed. Doesn't mean their should be super powered FOTM builds dominating everyone, but an Anti-Mage should be just that, along with all the weakness to other classes. Someone messing you up, counter it, simple. Assuming of course that is isn't easy to slap together a build that 1-shots people. It appears EQN wants to go down that MOBA PvP path, and that is all about balance with no regard to PvE fun and variety..
Smite has 49 classes (Gods) that all have their own flare allowing for fun and variety for each. Even those that share roles and similar abilities are different enough that switching one for another can impact game play. Pretty sure EQN with a more complex class-ability-gear system will be able to have plenty of fun and variety.
Balance wise. It is all about perspective. My example of an Anti-Mage is a balance of strength vs 1 class/role with the weakness against others. Not that every class has to have the same damage output or access to the same number of CC/Elite abilities (like GW2).
With 8 abilities class locked, I'd guess that 5 or so are DPS and 3 are "class defining", like summon pets, big heals, stealth, etc. ( no offense: but this tells me you didn't read and listen to that the devs talked about.. It isnt' that easy or fun.. Each class is limited and restricted to what they can and no not do.. Such as your example, a Rouge for example can NOT load up on ALL DPS fun, and toss in other stuff of his free will..
Not sure where you went with this. What isn't easy or fun? 40+ classes, pick one that fits a particular want at the moment. Each class will have at least 8 unique abilities, some being DPS, some being class defining, mix match the remaining slots or not. Sounds easy and fun to me.
You are correct a Rogue couldn't stack all 12 abilities with DPS as 8 are pre-defined and the 4 remaining have to fall within the move-utility-off-def restrictions. BUT a rogue by default could have more DPS oriented abilities and slots available. So where a Cleric might have 4 out of 8 skills being DPS and zero of the secondary slots for offense, a rogue could have 6 out of 8 DPS and 2 offensive slots on the secondary bar.
What people think of when X class is mentioned. The other 4 slots are home to less popular abilities that could fit into other classes. So while a Warrior probably shouldn't have a huge heal, a small hot or dmg shield could be okay.Also every skill or ability cost points to use, and the bigger the skill the more it cost.. Some gear and items will give you some flexibility in this, but you will still be limited to what and how often you can use skills..
Yep. Which adds another layer to template design and players having to choose what they want to do. Be an all out Warrior, add in a bit of Wizard-Bard, go for that really resource heavy ability, etc. Options.
In the above example, if an encounter has a heavy amount of dmg given to players in a short period, picking a rogue with 8 out of 12 abilities being dps/offense might not be the best idea as it most likely has weak defense, cc, support, etc. Picking a Cleric, Warrior, Shadowknight, etc might be better suited. Players can still do whatever they want, but their chances of winning might be very low compared to another setup.
MOBAs (which SOE uses to compare) are an easy way to see where they are going. Classes have even fewer abilities/items then EQN, yet still have options. Simply replacing 1 class for another can have a big impact on the team and it's synergy. Certain items or just how one plays the class can also make a big difference. I seriously doubt that EQN will give people the ability to switch classes and skill slots on the fly.. and SURE as hell NOT in combat..
They've already said that templates can be switched on the fly out of combat. Even said there will be ways to manage multiple gear sets and other issues that would come up.
Watching pro matches and how they take forever to select their team because each enemy pick is something they have to think over. Can't just pick DPS DPS DPS WIN. There is strategy needed. This frightens me.. If SOE thinks that they are going to grab ALL of LoL customers, without alienating the traditional MMORPG fans, good luck on that.. I think SOE is trying to marry MOBA to MMORPG, and I don't see that offspring being very pretty..
They are trying to marry it all. While I'm sure they would love LoL's ~70 million players, highly doubtful. MOBAs are their own thing. Just like Minecraft is it's own thing. Doesn't mean EQN (Landmark) can't incorporate some of the elements. Beyond MOBA flexible role/class elements and gear stats, there isn't much else they could bring into EQN.
If by traditional you mean the very small "old school" crowd, EQN doesn't have to be the game for everyone. Heck the graphics alone are going to turn most middle aged men away (until they see the half-naked dark elf girls of course).
This is one idea I find silly. Assuming a "next-gen" game is going to cater to "traditional" players. Do people assume that PS4 games are going to cater to ATARI die hards? I'm glad I'm a gamer and don't limit myself to such labels or closed ways of thinking. Like it all, enjoy it all.
Roles are still there, but are flexible within the team's make up. If everyone just DPS or Offense or Defense, usually there is trouble. People have to be able to go in and out of various roles on the fly. It isn't locked down (Trinity) where you just do the same thing over and over forever. Personally I think most classes and characters will just be homogenized clones of each other (75%) and the other 25% will be unique perks that are fun, but nothing that will be OP, or defining in combat..
You could be right. With 40+ classes, there will be overlap, we've already seen it in their examples of classes using 2-handed swords. But they've pointed out that they are trying to make every class unique within limits. DAoC has almost 50 classes I think and did a very good job of making each unique, even though many were similar. With the focus on "heroic" stances, movement, combat, gear, etc I think every class will stand on it's own, even if sharing qualities of others. Like MOBAs. Going back to Smite, there is a lot of surface similarity between the classes because of the limited tools each has, but at the same time, if one was removed or another was added, people would notice. They all make an impact.
Keep in mind.. YOU are looking at EQN as being GROUP VS GROUP(mobs) combat and I doubt that will be the case.. Most people will solo and in that case it doesn't matter what the AI is, smart or dumb, the mob(s) only have ONE target to fight against.. So.. that being the case.. Assuming 90% of MMO players are going into the world soloing, how many mobs will be solo or in groups? Smart or dumb solo mob is GOING to die, regardless who is tank or healer.. But if you assume that most combat will be small groups like in GW2.. Then the solo player MUST have overpowering advantage to survive a 2 or 3 on 1 fight.. If that holds trues.. then 2 or 3 players will go thru that same mob group like a hot knife thru butter, just like in GW2 and SWTOR..
I get the feeling you think that EQN open world combat will be mostly 3v3 combat where the mobs are equally strong as the players.. NOT GONNA TO HAPPEN.. Lets wait and see what the average mob encounter is..
So far, everything they've said has pretty much pointed towards large encounters. From the public events (Rallying Calls) to Dragon ("bring a small army") and Orc slaying ("thousands of Orcs in Crushbone").
You really believe that players are going to be soloing or even going in a small groups 1 mile+ in to the world and the 5+ tiers? I have no doubt there will be plenty of solo content, but the world is going to be massive, plenty of room for everything.
What so far leads you to believe soloing will be 90% of the game, beyond assumptions based on games that have come before? Which they've said they are trying to break away from completely.
Without an end game, what is the point in soloing all the time? Soloing came about because it was the fastest method to reach the carrot. If given the option and equally or even rewarded more, I think most would prefer to group. It's when the game is designed in such a way that people start to go off alone to complete the 10 quests they just got in 5 seconds at the hub. It's all a race to the finish. Remove the finish line and people start to look around and go "hey, how's it going, my name's Bob and I like to kill Dragons."
It seems like a huge waste of time/money to invest in Storybricks and basically base the game around the emergent AI to make a single-player game again. This seems to be the reason they rebooted multiple times. They didn't want to make EQ 3 or WoW 2.
You're right that we will have to see what happens, but again, you either take their word or don't. If you can't take their word, then there isn't much room for discussion that isn't totally based on past game performances and assumptions that SOE is run by idiots that are just going to do the same thing all over again.
If you are willing to take what they say as at least partially true or possible, then some of the crazy ideas start to work. Everything they have going is revolving around the AI. If it turns out to be a joke, the combat, PVE, world in general is just mmo #29892 to be forgotten.
Just for a little clarification, the way skills will work is that the first 4 are based on the equipped weapon and the last 4 are utility skills. Each class will have more than 4 utility skills and they will be broken up into sub-categories i.e. movement, cc, dps.
When creating a build players will choose the base class and that will determine what the weapon skills do and what types of utility skills they can slot. i.e. Warrior has 1 dps, 1 movement and 2 defense skills while rogue has 2 dps 1 movement 1 cc skill, etc.
Any of those last 4 skill slots can be filled with any of the secondary class skills that you've unlocked but they have to match the types of skill slots that your class has.
As was said those off-class skills may have a higher energy cost but that can be mitigated with equipment.
Once they get to the Q&A section you will notice a large amount of the questions are the same thing that made me go WTF, they are ditching the Trinity System and instead going with a GW2 like build. Personally I much prefer structured play, I don't have any qualms about multi-class characters or not needing alts but there is no way I am going trough another GW2 or NWO style dungeon run where everyone zergs in, some may like it but not for me.
They say that they have "systems in place" to make sure any group can complete content no matter there make up, all this translates to in my opinion and experience is people who want to play the two support roles "tank & healer" will be snubbed for another dps, because whether you can complete content with a balanced group or not, you can complete it faster with 5 people in full dps mode.
The trinity system has it's flaws granted but I believe it is still superior to the system that they are planning to implement, I still want to try the game, but after hearing the same PR bull from the GW2 team I am more than a little sceptical that this game will cater to it's intended market
Well, GW2 didn't do the no trinity combat system well at all, at least in my opinion anyway. That being said, the trinity is old, outdated, and nothing more than a lazy developers dream. It was developed because technology wouldn't support intelligent AI but now it "should" be doable. Besides, real combat is chaos and why in god's green earth would you attack a big armored buffoon that couldn't kill a swamp rat by himself over a leather wearing back stabber that could one shot you or a dress and pointy hat wearing caster that could nuke your ass before you turned your attention to the guy insulting your momma? You wouldn't so why do support that kind of system? It's because it's easy, convenient, and that's the way we've always done it.
All that being said, you don't like the direction $OE is going? No worries, no one likes every game. Wait for something more your style or play something that's a better fit.
Perhaps the trinity system was just developers being lazy, but as far as I am concerned it is far superior to the system in GW2 where no one needs anyone.
When I first started playing MMOs I was attracted to the gameplay in them because OF the trinity and how it required Players to be interdependent rather than independent. MMOs required Players to cooperate and collaborate to reach goals.... MMOs were not all about competition like most console games at the time (that I had played).
I will always seek out a MMO with a trinity system or similar rather than play a MMO where everyone is DPS, just different flavors of it. I left GW2 specifically because it has no trinity system.
You and others may view the trinity system as a failure, a mistake. I view the trinity system as an epiphany in online gaming. To me it's what makes an online game into a MMO in a very fundamental sense.
Keep in mind.. YOU are looking at EQN as being GROUP VS GROUP(mobs) combat and I doubt that will be the case.. Most people will solo and in that case it doesn't matter what the AI is, smart or dumb, the mob(s) only have ONE target to fight against.. So.. that being the case.. Assuming 90% of MMO players are going into the world soloing, how many mobs will be solo or in groups? Smart or dumb solo mob is GOING to die, regardless who is tank or healer.. But if you assume that most combat will be small groups like in GW2.. Then the solo player MUST have overpowering advantage to survive a 2 or 3 on 1 fight.. If that holds trues.. then 2 or 3 players will go thru that same mob group like a hot knife thru butter, just like in GW2 and SWTOR..
I get the feeling you think that EQN open world combat will be mostly 3v3 combat where the mobs are equally strong as the players.. NOT GONNA TO HAPPEN.. Lets wait and see what the average mob encounter is..
The world is a sandbox, there will be no set mob spawns excepting dungeons, so it's very likely that players could encounter a group of mobs that they are unable to solo. There will also be the possibility that when digging down you could encounter and area where you need help to complete it as well, so you would either have to call friends to help, or maybe you could sell the co-ordinates to a group in the area for a finders fee so you can at least get something out of content you are unable to solo.
Their plan for this game is to be a simulated world not a themepark so they will balance content on player's equip tier vs mob difficulty but where and when the encounters happen will be randomized.
Keep in mind.. YOU are looking at EQN as being GROUP VS GROUP(mobs) combat and I doubt that will be the case.. Most people will solo and in that case it doesn't matter what the AI is, smart or dumb, the mob(s) only have ONE target to fight against.. So.. that being the case.. Assuming 90% of MMO players are going into the world soloing, how many mobs will be solo or in groups? Smart or dumb solo mob is GOING to die, regardless who is tank or healer.. But if you assume that most combat will be small groups like in GW2.. Then the solo player MUST have overpowering advantage to survive a 2 or 3 on 1 fight.. If that holds trues.. then 2 or 3 players will go thru that same mob group like a hot knife thru butter, just like in GW2 and SWTOR..
I get the feeling you think that EQN open world combat will be mostly 3v3 combat where the mobs are equally strong as the players.. NOT GONNA TO HAPPEN.. Lets wait and see what the average mob encounter is..
The world is a sandbox, there will be no set mob spawns excepting dungeons, so it's very likely that players could encounter a group of mobs that they are unable to solo. There will also be the possibility that when digging down you could encounter and area where you need help to complete it as well, so you would either have to call friends to help, or maybe you could sell the co-ordinates to a group in the area for a finders fee so you can at least get something out of content you are unable to solo.
Their plan for this game is to be a simulated world not a themepark so they will balance content on player's equip tier vs mob difficulty but where and when the encounters happen will be randomized.
Dungeons won't have set of mob spawns either. They aren't static.
Originally posted by evilized And you seem to be assuming that the game will be tailored towards the solo player and not towards parties or having a balanced variety of content. If soloing is the future of MMOs as you seem to think it is then my mmo days may be coming to an end.
Hate to tell you , but soloing has been around since WoW days.. I suspect that 90% of EQN will be soloed.. Which means your smart AI means NOTHING.. I'm sure there will be areas that "Crushbone" that will promote group play, but how is that to work out? Soft grouping like GW2, or will it be hard code tag? There are a lot of details NOT yet discussed by the devs and I question WHY is that? Be prepared.. lol
Hate to tell you , but soloing has been around since WoW days.. I suspect that 90% of EQN will be soloed.. Which means your smart AI means NOTHING.. I'm sure there will be areas that "Crushbone" that will promote group play, but how is that to work out? Soft grouping like GW2, or will it be hard code tag? There are a lot of details NOT yet discussed by the devs and I question WHY is that? Be prepared.. lol
You're probably right about that. The same trend/changes has hit EQ1, EQ2 and a shitload of MMOs.
The result is the same for me. I get insanely bored and will quit. I usually last around half way to max level. I just don't get it, why does ppl want easy mode in an MMO? Go play single player games if you want that.
As for the title, the trinity works why change it? The problem is, for the trinity to work, you need group and groups need challenge to be make the game become rewarding and that doesn't exist today.
Originally posted by Rydeson Hate to tell you , but soloing has been around since WoW days.. I suspect that 90% of EQN will be soloed.. Which means your smart AI means NOTHING.. I'm sure there will be areas that "Crushbone" that will promote group play, but how is that to work out? Soft grouping like GW2, or will it be hard code tag? There are a lot of details NOT yet discussed by the devs and I question WHY is that? Be prepared.. lol
You're probably right about that. The same trend/changes has hit EQ1, EQ2 and a shitload of MMOs.The result is the same for me. I get insanely bored and will quit. I usually last around half way to max level. I just don't get it, why does ppl want easy mode in an MMO? Go play single player games if you want that.As for the title, the trinity works why change it? The problem is, for the trinity to work, you need group and groups need challenge to be make the game become rewarding and that doesn't exist today.
I agree. I've never been able to understand why solo players make a big deal over content that forces them into group. It is Massively Multipler not Massively Solo.
That said, I don't have an issue with changing trinity or tweaking it. As long as what they come up with is better. It seems like different has become more important than better lately.
Comments
I wanted to add to this part.. It amazes me how those that are anti-trinity become so focused on their position, they end up being just as blind as those that are trinity fanbois.. Lets address the poster excuse why trinity is bad.. All I hear from Georgie Peorgie and others is, "a mob would not just sit being taunted by the tank while the healer gets no attention". Well here we go.. If you are 1 of a few mobs being ganged up by 5 players.. It's obvious the man with the shield bashing your nose in, is the tank. Now as for the other 4 members of the group.. One of them wearing cloth, two of them wearing leather, and the fourth wearing chain, ALL of them waving their arms saying some unknown words.. Which one is the healer? Is there some magical icon over their heads pointing to them? Using WoW classes as the example.. That cloth class could be healing priest, or maybe a dps priest.. maybe not a priest at all.. As for the leather classes, maybe they are both druids, but one is a healing druid and the other is a dps druid, or even better, maybe both are healing druids, then what? Chain class would be any spec of Shaman.. So there is NO WAY a mob that is being smashed by a shield and cut by a sword knows WHERE those heals are coming from.. Get the idea yet?
Now I"m all for cleaning up the trinity, and making it more realistic, but I"m definitely against scrapping it all together and end up with some DPS meta game, where everyone is basically DPS, with only minor skills in everything else.. Now as for the cleaning up the trinity.. There should be a threat meter.. Some magical number in code needs to tell that mob WHO he hates most.. Is it the man with the shield bashing his face?, or the man standing in the distance with a bow, while arrows are hitting him in the butt? OR does the mob just loathe a certain race for no reason.. It has to be a physical explanation, and healing isn't one of them.. Maybe the healing role itself needs to be tweaked.. Make it more visual, and something that can be interrupted? But once it's interrupted, the mob goes back to fighting the closest man that is bashing his nose?
GW2 feels more like everyone is 80-90% DPS and the rest is other stuff.. I would like to keep the ROLE combat more prominent and variable.. I don't want to go back to the days that a role is GIMPED from solo play like a rogue or warrior was in EQ, but there has to be a better alternative.. I enjoyed the variety of roles that players brought to the group.. First, increase group size to minimum of 6.. Bring back those lost skills like Feign Death, CC, Buff, and Debuff.. As a percentage I would like to see the characters maybe be 40-50% DPS, so that they can SOLO any trash mob in the game.. and the rest would be class role defining skills and abilities as mentioned.. In addition and in conclusion, there should be NO BALANCE in classes when it comes to PvP play.. That too has a negative effect on why devs resort to DPS meta classes.. It's easier to balance by the numbers.. So I can only assume that EQN is going to promote balanced PvP.. Grrrrrrr
I'm glad they are innovating the genre.
I really enjoyed the combat and gameplay of GW2 but it had such awful design choices in terms of progression and daily/monthly BS that I just couldn't keep playing it.
Wildstar/ESO/Archeage are new MMORPGs that are going to offer the "trinity" of sorts so keep an eye out for those if that's your cookie.
IMO, I would like to see classes be more like EQ's Druid and Shaman's for example.. Both of them could solo just about anything in the game.. And in a group environment, both were welcomed.. I as a druid could toss out heals as the main healer, but I always did snaring, and even toss in a DOT as well.. I had DD spells, but didn't want to overcook the mobs and waste mana.. So I could CC, Solo, Heal and DPS if need.. Personally I wish combat was slower, so DOTS were more effective in combat.. EQ had some amazing classes with versatility such as the Bard.. That is what I'm talking about.. Bring back classes that are capable of soloing, yet have class defining skills and abilities that make them special.. BUT NEVER required..
That statement is pretty much why I'm confused that anyone thinks EQN is following GW2. The game is fundamentally flawed or not depending how you look at it. To me GW2 is a PVP game, PVE is a time-sink. Self-Rez is one of the most OP skills in other games where it is usually only a class or two and requires some effort. Having every class do it easily is over the top.
Druid/Shaman are pretty much what I expect out of EQN. Roles with sub roles. Not exactly "hybrids" or "Jack of all trades" but classes that have options within their little area of use.
I too wish DOTs would make a come back and am hoping with 40+ classes that some go that path. A long with them, I hope there are encounters where DOTs are the way to go and actually have a use instead of instant cast everything. And not just mobs with huge HP pools that need to be ticked down, but mechanics/strategy that DOTs counter and work against to actually make it exciting.
I'm right with you. PVP should have no balance. With multi-classing, it isn't needed. Doesn't mean their should be super powered FOTM builds dominating everyone, but an Anti-Mage should be just that, along with all the weakness to other classes. Someone messing you up, counter it, simple. Assuming of course that is isn't easy to slap together a build that 1-shots people.
With 8 abilities class locked, I'd guess that 5 or so are DPS and 3 are "class defining", like summon pets, big heals, stealth, etc. What people think of when X class is mentioned. The other 4 slots are home to less popular abilities that could fit into other classes. So while a Warrior probably shouldn't have a huge heal, a small hot or dmg shield could be okay.
MOBAs (which SOE uses to compare) are an easy way to see where they are going. Classes have even fewer abilities/items then EQN, yet still have options. Simply replacing 1 class for another can have a big impact on the team and it's synergy. Certain items or just how one plays the class can also make a big difference.
Watching pro matches and how they take forever to select their team because each enemy pick is something they have to think over. Can't just pick DPS DPS DPS WIN. There is strategy needed.
Roles are still there, but are flexible within the team's make up. If everyone just DPS or Offense or Defense, usually there is trouble. People have to be able to go in and out of various roles on the fly. It isn't locked down (Trinity) where you just do the same thing over and over forever.
While I'm doubting EQN will carbon copy MOBA mechanics, after playing them myself, I've grown to see the connection and how it can work much better then either the trinity or pure dps. A big part of it is the enemy. Either hard bots or players totally change the dynamic vs stupid trinity AI.
It is chaotic, but there are still patterns and strategies within the chaos that become familiar. A map might only have 10 popular methods of winning, but 10 is much better then 1-2. Hopefully EQN makes it even greater. No matter what, with enough time, players will get the hang of things and "best methods" will emerge. Hopefully SOE can continue to tweak the mechanics so there are still surprises waiting.
Sorry, didn't read the whole thing, but for me "advanced AI" is not PVP.
Who doesn't want a challenge? Better AI allows for a wide range of possibilities. A rat doesn't need to know how to counter my fireball, but a Dragon probably can. Where as most games, a dragon and a rat usually only differ by a few million health and a couple abilities.
While I don't consider myself a PVEr, they usually seem concerned with being ganked, camped, harassed, and overall just don't like their day being crapped on by others for no reason.
Mobs can't gather on forums or talk crap in chat. Sure they can pop out of the bushes and kill me while I'm resting, but they aren't hopefully going to send /tells about my mom, continue to follow me around and wait until I'm weak from another mob fight, or run around a zone with 10 friends doing 10 vs 1 fights.
If AI was so smart that I couldn't tell who was a player or mob, I would be delighted, then again I love PVP. But it wouldn't be possible, because there is a lot more to it the "difficulty". A lot of the negatives of PVP come from human's being jerks to one another, usually without cause.
I think you are really limiting the options.
Many games have god-mode bots that instant head-shot, can hear/see everything, and basically are unrealistically difficult.
That isn't what they are going for.
Storybricks which controls the AI is all about making "realistic" AI, obviously within limits, no Skynet yet. Mobs would have likes-dislikes-weaknesses-strengths. Not god-mode AI. Mobs and Players would be able to react and counter one another in some form of realism. Each trying to exploit the other and win. Some mobs could be extra tough, but hopefully not to the extreme of needing 1000 people to kill 1 rat because it is a laser shooting super ninja rat.
They themselves have said that the tough AI has been around for a long time, but it wasn't possible to implement it in a way that wouldn't be so hard that players would give up. They've claimed to be able to balance it out and this is what is supposed to be the foundation of EQN's AI, PVE, combat, world.
I've said it before, but they are making some pretty wild claims. If they fall short, there really isn't much backpedaling for them to do. Either they were bending the truth and trying to hype it up way too much or are spot on and the game will be great.
Sorry, I think my previous response was more towards the person you were agreeing with. Their comment about SOE "banking" on DPS meta type games seems so wrong to me with what they've shown so far. Guess I'm just bored waiting for news of any kind for EQN (Landmark is okay for the time being) and have read too much about EQN and I either assume others don't know as much as I or totally throw it out the window and come to some odd conclusions. Or of course, I'm just letting my imagination get the best of me. Go go hype train!
with 40 playable classes I don't think anyone needs to worry about a lack of functionality with their character skill builds... sad that this thread has gotten so long and people still cant quite grasp the idea that the roles of tank, dps and healer will still be present in the game just not in the same manner as WoW, EQ2 or any of the other theme parks currently live.
think of group dynamics in ultima online if you want to know what grouping will more than likely resemble in EQN.
It is 2 am in real life and the server is rather empty. I find a couple people to group with but neither are tanks or healers. They are by default utility players. I am DPS. One of the people has unlock the warrior class and has somewhat decent armor and weapon to go with it. The other has unlocked the cleric but only has a couple healing skills. I switch to ranger to provide cover and be able to move around to maintain line of sight. We happily go hunting for that group that actually needs the trinity to defeat.
With the old system: Shout "any tanks lvl 22-26 willing to group" ... still shouting 45 minutes later "come on isn't there just 1 tank that can group for the 15 minutes I have left?"
You might want to wait till you actually SEE the classes and what skills/spells they will have.. I would almost bet most of the abilities will be very homogenized to work the same as many others.. Sure you just unlocked pyromancer class that gives you a firebolt spells that you can swap out with your frost bolt spells.. Guess, what? They are both single target DD spells causing 100 pts of damage.. One comes with red graphics, the other comes with blue graphics.. Get the idea? Lets not overhype or imagine what you want.. Lets see what is actually SERVED..
Keep in mind.. YOU are looking at EQN as being GROUP VS GROUP(mobs) combat and I doubt that will be the case.. Most people will solo and in that case it doesn't matter what the AI is, smart or dumb, the mob(s) only have ONE target to fight against.. So.. that being the case.. Assuming 90% of MMO players are going into the world soloing, how many mobs will be solo or in groups? Smart or dumb solo mob is GOING to die, regardless who is tank or healer.. But if you assume that most combat will be small groups like in GW2.. Then the solo player MUST have overpowering advantage to survive a 2 or 3 on 1 fight.. If that holds trues.. then 2 or 3 players will go thru that same mob group like a hot knife thru butter, just like in GW2 and SWTOR..
I get the feeling you think that EQN open world combat will be mostly 3v3 combat where the mobs are equally strong as the players.. NOT GONNA TO HAPPEN.. Lets wait and see what the average mob encounter is..
Sorry, but no. Quake AI was not advanced. It got neither an advanced AI behavoir nor advanced combat tactics. The Quake AI could beat you, because Quake was a aiming game.. and when your AI hits every time from almost every fucking position(like a AimBot) it seems to be advanced... but beside of perfect aim, and perfect reaction(dodge exactly when you fire at him) it wasn't advanced. MMO combat is completely different, you do not have a lot of twitch requirements, you don't aim anything(and if you have aim your hitzone is as bis as that it is almost impossible not to hit), but you do have different abilities, you do have different classes/roles, and you do have teamwork.
On the other side Storybricks does not offer super clever AI, it does offer more realistic behaivor.. and one point of that is, that it may sometimes don't do the perfect decision, but rather a not so good decision.. exactly as we humans do it. And therefore it may become a lot more unpredictable, and a lot more interesting, a lot more as you would fight against real humans with all their weakness, but also there posibilities to react differently to different situations.. and not like the usual AI always the same.
And because of that ideally a PvE group encounter may look a lot more like a pvp match, where both parties(Players and AI) react to the decisions of the other one, and more importantly don't react always the same.. the combat may feel fresh every time(hopefully).
And again.. as i and other already said no trinity does not mean no different roles and no teamwork. And even the devs said it.. it is not GW2.
Hi,
I did not say that WoW designed Trinity. It doesn't matter who originally came up with the concept. WoW is the most successful and well-known MMO that uses Trinity. Given it's success and longevity, It is more likely that new MMO developers will be comparing and contrasting what they want to do to WoW.
I honestly don't have an issue with dumping "mechanics that work" if there is a better alternative. If "mechanics that work" were not occasionally dumped or improved upon, we wouldn't even have gaming at all. My only issue is coming up with a worse alternative just to be different. I'd say just go with Trinity if the best alternative you can come up with is a Faceroll Easymode DPS fest like GW2, but I am definitely open to new systems that are actually better than Trinity.
The issue with trinity has nothing to do with mage. People are just tired of it. That means that any new MMO using Trinity needs to modify or tweak it to be unique, or scrap it and come up with something new.
You're right that we will have to see what happens, but again, you either take their word or don't. If you can't take their word, then there isn't much room for discussion that isn't totally based on past game performances and assumptions that SOE is run by idiots that are just going to do the same thing all over again.
If you are willing to take what they say as at least partially true or possible, then some of the crazy ideas start to work. Everything they have going is revolving around the AI. If it turns out to be a joke, the combat, PVE, world in general is just mmo #29892 to be forgotten.
Just for a little clarification, the way skills will work is that the first 4 are based on the equipped weapon and the last 4 are utility skills. Each class will have more than 4 utility skills and they will be broken up into sub-categories i.e. movement, cc, dps.
When creating a build players will choose the base class and that will determine what the weapon skills do and what types of utility skills they can slot. i.e. Warrior has 1 dps, 1 movement and 2 defense skills while rogue has 2 dps 1 movement 1 cc skill, etc.
Any of those last 4 skill slots can be filled with any of the secondary class skills that you've unlocked but they have to match the types of skill slots that your class has.
As was said those off-class skills may have a higher energy cost but that can be mitigated with equipment.
Perhaps the trinity system was just developers being lazy, but as far as I am concerned it is far superior to the system in GW2 where no one needs anyone.
When I first started playing MMOs I was attracted to the gameplay in them because OF the trinity and how it required Players to be interdependent rather than independent. MMOs required Players to cooperate and collaborate to reach goals.... MMOs were not all about competition like most console games at the time (that I had played).
I will always seek out a MMO with a trinity system or similar rather than play a MMO where everyone is DPS, just different flavors of it. I left GW2 specifically because it has no trinity system.
You and others may view the trinity system as a failure, a mistake. I view the trinity system as an epiphany in online gaming. To me it's what makes an online game into a MMO in a very fundamental sense.
The world is a sandbox, there will be no set mob spawns excepting dungeons, so it's very likely that players could encounter a group of mobs that they are unable to solo. There will also be the possibility that when digging down you could encounter and area where you need help to complete it as well, so you would either have to call friends to help, or maybe you could sell the co-ordinates to a group in the area for a finders fee so you can at least get something out of content you are unable to solo.
Their plan for this game is to be a simulated world not a themepark so they will balance content on player's equip tier vs mob difficulty but where and when the encounters happen will be randomized.
Dungeons won't have set of mob spawns either. They aren't static.
Hate to tell you , but soloing has been around since WoW days.. I suspect that 90% of EQN will be soloed.. Which means your smart AI means NOTHING.. I'm sure there will be areas that "Crushbone" that will promote group play, but how is that to work out? Soft grouping like GW2, or will it be hard code tag? There are a lot of details NOT yet discussed by the devs and I question WHY is that? Be prepared.. lol
You're probably right about that. The same trend/changes has hit EQ1, EQ2 and a shitload of MMOs.
The result is the same for me. I get insanely bored and will quit. I usually last around half way to max level. I just don't get it, why does ppl want easy mode in an MMO? Go play single player games if you want that.
As for the title, the trinity works why change it? The problem is, for the trinity to work, you need group and groups need challenge to be make the game become rewarding and that doesn't exist today.
I agree. I've never been able to understand why solo players make a big deal over content that forces them into group. It is Massively Multipler not Massively Solo.That said, I don't have an issue with changing trinity or tweaking it. As long as what they come up with is better. It seems like different has become more important than better lately.