"My opinion is that even in skill based systems where there are no true tanks or healers but mostly hybrids, roles really don't change all that much, you're higher armored group members take the damage and harrass people, your higher dps focus fire and your better healers keep people up. I can't see GW2 being to far removed from this ideal, I also never saw GW1 as being far removed from it."
Ummm?? Really? There's no healers to keep anyone up.. No class has the ability to keep a player up through large damaging situations, that is far removed from it. Players will have to switch roles mid combat according to situations, that doesn't happen in any other MMO. Your either stuck in your role in a themepark game during combat, or in a skill based game you will opperate accordingly to your skill dispensation.
Uhm, well, actually EVERYONE has the ability to keep themselves up, and as I said in my other post, they changed the role of healer to basically "support" which just means you'll be using another tactic to mitigate or remove damage from another player. Some *classes* have that ability in other games without the necessity for healing as being the primary reactive defensive measure.
Nobody has the ability to sit their absorb dmg and keep themselves up. They will have to move effectively and yes in doing so they can keep themselves up. However, there are no MMO's that I can recall that offer a fully proactive method of keeping supporting team members. Also, while some classes may be using these support abilities in proactive methods they will also be switching roles on the fly and dishing out dmg. to enemies and controlling enemies. That is my major point.
And in response to the OP, no HP will not be to a ridiculous point to where it mitigates player skill usage. The game is built for skill being the winning factor in the balancing mechanics. However, certain classes will go about their roles in different manners, a thief could be just as frontline as a warrior but they will do it differently, thus the HP difference. A Warrior isn't going to be as mobile, thus they have more HP because they are more of a blunt force brawling type. In MMA terms, a Warrior is your fighter who stays in the pocket when throwing combinations, instead of being a precision type fighter who throws a combo and moves out, he stays in the pocket and throws with ill will. Yes there will be times he will have to avoid dmg. because he can't just stand there and take it, however he won't be the most mobile about it and will absorb more dmg. than a precision fighter. A precision fighter like the thief, would be one who gets in the pocket launches an assault and moves off to the side or out of the fray, then he will choose to reenter when wisest. This is why there are different HP levels, because it results in different play styles for the different roles assumed by different classes.
Since I started this thread, I think its fair to say that most of you completely missed the question I raised.
Will the warrior/tank like professions in this game have ridiculously high hit points that void player skill? I didnt say shit about tanks, and the trinity or rock/paper/scissors.
Holy shit I hope someone closes this thread.
People have already answered that. There isn't really a 'tank-like' profession.
The two classes with the highest armor class, in the demo, had the most and second from the least amount of hp.
So warriors can have a lot of hp.
Guardians have very little.
Necromancers, who wear cloth, have nearly as much as warriors.
There are stats that modify the amount of armor and hp characters have, so any character can have more/less armor/hp than the 'standard' for their class.
We don't have the complete picture, but SO FAR, it doesn't seem like any one class has an overwhelming amount of durability.
Yes, if you take a thief and put it up against a warrior toe to toe trading hits, the thief will probably die.
.... but that person is PLAYING THE THIEF WRONG, so they probably deserved to die.
The warrior IS supposed to be one of the easiest classes to learn, but that doesn't mean it voids player skill.
So still have any questions, or do I need to clear up more? (Actually, most of the things I said here were already said during the thread, but I guess since they weren't explicitly listed as answers to your questions, you didn't notice them)
(edit: Yes, originally I didn't answer your first post, because I was busy responding to OTHER people's questions. That's just the way forums work. Topics evolve. I honestly figured other people had answered your question sufficiently. If I haven't this time, feel free to ask me to explain every little detail you need help with.)
I should of made it clear, you answered that as well as a few other people. Thank you /bow
"My opinion is that even in skill based systems where there are no true tanks or healers but mostly hybrids, roles really don't change all that much, you're higher armored group members take the damage and harrass people, your higher dps focus fire and your better healers keep people up. I can't see GW2 being to far removed from this ideal, I also never saw GW1 as being far removed from it."
Ummm?? Really? There's no healers to keep anyone up.. No class has the ability to keep a player up through large damaging situations, that is far removed from it. Players will have to switch roles mid combat according to situations, that doesn't happen in any other MMO. Your either stuck in your role in a themepark game during combat, or in a skill based game you will opperate accordingly to your skill dispensation.
Uhm, well, actually EVERYONE has the ability to keep themselves up, and as I said in my other post, they changed the role of healer to basically "support" which just means you'll be using another tactic to mitigate or remove damage from another player. Some *classes* have that ability in other games without the necessity for healing as being the primary reactive defensive measure.
Nobody has the ability to sit their absorb dmg and keep themselves up. They will have to move effectively and yes in doing so they can keep themselves up. However, there are no MMO's that I can recall that offer a fully proactive method of keeping supporting team members. Also, while some classes may be using these support abilities in proactive methods they will also be switching roles on the fly and dishing out dmg. to enemies and controlling enemies. That is my major point.
Well, that really depends, nobody can sit there and absorb damage any more or less than they could in other games if you really thinkg about it. Instead of healing back health, instead you mitigate it. A guardian can just block attacks, not taking more damage by doing so, and only being able to achieve this for however long their ability or energy lasts. Then depending on the ability, they could use it again in quick succession, or use an alternate ability utilizing the same properties.
As for proactive methods in other MMOs, I can think of a couple off the top of my head, one being a forcefield defender in CoH, and another being the tank classes in WAR. Some of the tank classes in WAR did exactly what GW2 does where positioning your character in front of your team and utilizing a shield could mitigate damage quite a bit. They also had a feature they are using in SWTOR too where you could place a kind of damage debuff on another player to allow you to soak up some of the damage they receive. Its done similarly in SWTOR -- with some changes of course.
As for switching weapons, its an OPTION that you have, but it doesn't necessarily mean that by switching your weapons you are forced to switch your role entirely. For example, who's to say that you can spec some damage abilities with your sword as a ranger, and then switch so that you have some more damage abilities with your bow? As far as I can tell theres nothing stopping you from doing that, and for a pure damage dealer it might not be a bad idea to have DPS at both ranges.
Since I started this thread, I think its fair to say that most of you completely missed the question I raised.
Will the warrior/tank like professions in this game have ridiculously high hit points that void player skill? I didnt say shit about tanks, and the trinity or rock/paper/scissors.
Holy shit I hope someone closes this thread.
People have already answered that. There isn't really a 'tank-like' profession.
The two classes with the highest armor class, in the demo, had the most and second from the least amount of hp.
So warriors can have a lot of hp.
Guardians have very little.
Necromancers, who wear cloth, have nearly as much as warriors.
There are stats that modify the amount of armor and hp characters have, so any character can have more/less armor/hp than the 'standard' for their class.
We don't have the complete picture, but SO FAR, it doesn't seem like any one class has an overwhelming amount of durability.
Yes, if you take a thief and put it up against a warrior toe to toe trading hits, the thief will probably die.
.... but that person is PLAYING THE THIEF WRONG, so they probably deserved to die.
The warrior IS supposed to be one of the easiest classes to learn, but that doesn't mean it voids player skill.
So still have any questions, or do I need to clear up more? (Actually, most of the things I said here were already said during the thread, but I guess since they weren't explicitly listed as answers to your questions, you didn't notice them)
(edit: Yes, originally I didn't answer your first post, because I was busy responding to OTHER people's questions. That's just the way forums work. Topics evolve. I honestly figured other people had answered your question sufficiently. If I haven't this time, feel free to ask me to explain every little detail you need help with.)
I should of made it clear, you answered that as well as a few other people. Thank you /bow
....and then the thread turned clusterfuck lol...
But of course. It really is par for the course here on mmorpg.com, as well with most other gameing oriented forums. You could talk about bunnies and lemonade and somehow the thread will be turned into a hate filled, mud slinging, finger pointing, intellegence insulting arguement that even politicians will look at and say "damn... thats harsh".
Since I started this thread, I think its fair to say that most of you completely missed the question I raised.
Will the warrior/tank like professions in this game have ridiculously high hit points that void player skill? I didnt say shit about tanks, and the trinity or rock/paper/scissors.
Holy shit I hope someone closes this thread.
People have already answered that. There isn't really a 'tank-like' profession.
The two classes with the highest armor class, in the demo, had the most and second from the least amount of hp.
So warriors can have a lot of hp.
Guardians have very little.
Necromancers, who wear cloth, have nearly as much as warriors.
There are stats that modify the amount of armor and hp characters have, so any character can have more/less armor/hp than the 'standard' for their class.
We don't have the complete picture, but SO FAR, it doesn't seem like any one class has an overwhelming amount of durability.
Yes, if you take a thief and put it up against a warrior toe to toe trading hits, the thief will probably die.
.... but that person is PLAYING THE THIEF WRONG, so they probably deserved to die.
The warrior IS supposed to be one of the easiest classes to learn, but that doesn't mean it voids player skill.
So still have any questions, or do I need to clear up more? (Actually, most of the things I said here were already said during the thread, but I guess since they weren't explicitly listed as answers to your questions, you didn't notice them)
(edit: Yes, originally I didn't answer your first post, because I was busy responding to OTHER people's questions. That's just the way forums work. Topics evolve. I honestly figured other people had answered your question sufficiently. If I haven't this time, feel free to ask me to explain every little detail you need help with.)
I should of made it clear, you answered that as well as a few other people. Thank you /bow
....and then the thread turned clusterfuck lol...
But of course. It really is par for the course here on mmorpg.com, as well with most other gameing oriented forums. You could talk about bunnies and lemonade and somehow the thread will be turned into a hate filled, mud slinging, finger pointing, intellegence insulting arguement that even politicians will look at and say "damn... thats harsh".
lol
Even among the GW2 fans, I think the only thing we can agree on is, "We would love for the game to be ready and for the game to launch!"
"My opinion is that even in skill based systems where there are no true tanks or healers but mostly hybrids, roles really don't change all that much, you're higher armored group members take the damage and harrass people, your higher dps focus fire and your better healers keep people up. I can't see GW2 being to far removed from this ideal, I also never saw GW1 as being far removed from it."
Ummm?? Really? There's no healers to keep anyone up.. No class has the ability to keep a player up through large damaging situations, that is far removed from it. Players will have to switch roles mid combat according to situations, that doesn't happen in any other MMO. Your either stuck in your role in a themepark game during combat, or in a skill based game you will opperate accordingly to your skill dispensation.
No you're right no healer class, but there is healing. Which will be a communal effort in a sense. You're wrong about people not switching skills up in other MMO's though, in pre-cu SWG depending on a situation there were multiple roles I could fill from melee to range to crowd control to all out tanking in PVP.
As far as healing went in our guild we had no truly dedicated healers just a bunch of hybrids that had some healing ability. It was a group effort to keep each other healed be it health healing or status healing (blinded, dizzy, dots etc..). This is what I meant by it won't be far removed from this, ignore it if you wish, but don't tell me what I've experienced in other games.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Ultimately, DPS/heal/tank just didn't cut it in our book...er, game. Our players demand more from Guild Wars 2 and we intend to deliver on that demand instead of delivering more of the same. Not only is the trinity very formulaic, but it leaves out a lot of gameplay elements that make many other games so much fun. Instead, we break these trinity categories down into a cooler, more versatile system:
You could say instead of DPS/heal/tank, we have our own trinity of damage, support, and control, but we prefer to think of them as the variety of elements that create a diverse and dynamic combat system that gives each player a toolbox to work with to solve any encounter we might throw their way. If that sounds like the kind of combat you are interested in, Guild Wars 2 is going to be a great place for you and your friends to fight together for many years to come.
I think ramanator0 an meowhead have given this thread all the info it needs. I agree that most, if not all, things discussed on GW2 is speculation at this point, I will be the first to admit that I still enjoy the thoughts and input brought forth by others. I read every scrap but I still learn new things and different perspectives. But complaining.... ahem.... discussing the health pool sounds kind of shallow to me. Also claiming that Anet is possibly giving the front liners more health than a mage for example simply because it has always been that way and calling them hypocrites is silly. If the first GW was decently balanced then that's really all I need to beleive the second will be as well, unless proven otherwise.
What information did Roman provide? 2 pages in and he said we cant discuss anything cause it hasn't been released yet.
Great idea, lets discuss things that are final, when there is nothing that can be done. Thats it, close the forums, NOTHING TO SEE HERE FOLKS!
Since I started this thread, I think its fair to say that most of you completely missed the question I raised.
Will the warrior/tank like professions in this game have ridiculously high hit points that void player skill? I didnt say shit about tanks, and the trinity or rock/paper/scissors.
Holy shit I hope someone closes this thread.
Actually what Romanator0 provided was direct sources that answer questions brought up here on the thread. Your questions were answered as well by meowhead and others you just can't seem to read them. I never said we shouldn't discuss things that aren't final. Quite contrary I said I liked hearing peoples opinions since I learn new things. I highlighted it for ya as well. Also as I pointed out I don't have much to add to the topic that hasn't been said. But exploding with your comment "Holy shit I hope someone closes this thread" is a piss poor way to go about a discussion wouldn't you say? Makes it difficult to respond to any comments if you are gonna rage about the answers you get.
Actually what Romanator0 provided was direct sources that answer questions brought up here on the thread. Your questions were answered as well by meowhead and others you just can't seem to read them. I never said we shouldn't discuss things that aren't final. Quite contrary I said I liked hearing peoples opinions since I learn new things. I highlighted it for ya as well. Also as I pointed out I don't have much to add to the topic that hasn't been said. But exploding with your comment "Holy shit I hope someone closes this thread" is a piss poor way to go about a discussion wouldn't you say? Makes it difficult to respond to any comments if you are gonna rage about the answers you get.
Good point, for me, I like stating what I'm feeling regardless of how on point it is, simply because if I'm wrong I will be corrected. I have no problem with being proven wrong, I actually like being proven wrong as it helps to further understand things I may be confused about. I don't get butt-hurt over it or lash out at those who have a better understanding. Unless of course someone tells me what to talk about .
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
you understand that hit points dont mean shit right? whats the difference in missing 2k health a warrior has and the ability of an ele to cast a bubble that absorbs 2k dmg? nothing... trinity isnt coming back... they can do away with it by having different tanking mechanincs for each class... just cuz a warrior has 10k health and 9k armor doesnt mean he is the best "tank". rogues can prolly dodge attacks/have faster health regen abilites/ or even stun lock tank... the options are endless in guild wars... not to mention its not always about absorbing the damage... guild wars is built around preventing the damage... knockdowns,stuns,slows,charms- they're all forms of tanking... just because you dont get hit doesnt mean your not tanking...
you understand that hit points dont mean shit right? whats the difference in missing 2k health a warrior has and the ability of an ele to cast a bubble that absorbs 2k dmg? nothing... trinity isnt coming back... they can do away with it by having different tanking mechanincs for each class... just cuz a warrior has 10k health and 9k armor doesnt mean he is the best "tank". rogues can prolly dodge attacks/have faster health regen abilites/ or even stun lock tank... the options are endless in guild wars... not to mention its not always about absorbing the damage... guild wars is built around preventing the damage... knockdowns,stuns,slows,charms- they're all forms of tanking... just because you dont get hit doesnt mean your not tanking...
Knockdowns, stuns, snares and mez's are all forms of crowd control, not tanking. Tanking means to absord the damage, as well as maintain aggro. There's a huge difference there.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
so lemmie get this straight... if you have aggro of a mob and you keep it knocked down or stunned or slowed the entire fight while either (you-solo) or(another person/people-group) kill it without taking damage your not effectively tanking? you sir should go back to the trinity. just because you dont lose health/hit points doesnt mean your not tanking... people are just to used to every other game making tanking a get hit in the face as much as you can.
FYI- pretty sure crowd control is mutiple mobs taken out of the fight as you control it... i know rogues have a sap and such but im thinking EQ here... not the crap wow made it to be.
so lemmie get this straight... if you have aggro of a mob and you keep it knocked down or stunned or slowed the entire fight while either (you-solo) or(another person/people-group) kill it without taking damage your not effectively tanking? you sir should go back to the trinity. just because you dont lose health/hit points doesnt mean your not tanking... people are just to used to every other game making tanking a get hit in the face as much as you can.
Actually he was right. Those things are not forms of tanking. They might get the same job done as a tank, but a tank is what we consider our meatshield, the person taking the damage and holding the aggro. Keeping someone stun locked or knocked down is a form of crowd control. Sure they can both stop everyone else from taking damage, but the key difference is a tank is taking damage (wether losing hitpoints or not due to a bubble cast on them, bubbles are damage mitigation, the damage is still there but it is being absorbed) a CCer prevents EVERYONE from taking damage, including themselves. No bubble, armor, or HP required.
GW2 will focus on use of CC and other tactics rather than having a meatshield to take all the damage.
Also, you mentioned a CCer keeping aggro of a mob. Thats another difference between tanking and CC. Tank requires keeping aggro to keep the enemy hitting them and not others. CC doesnt matter who has aggro, youre stopping them from doing any damage. Could be you, a healer, a tank, a dps... doesnt matter who has the aggro if the enemy cant hit anyone.
In response to your FYI Edit: The discussion you wer ehaving was related to only a single mob, but wether its 1 mob or 100, its the same. Tank functions 1 way, CC functions another. Stun locking an enemy is a form of controlling them. The ability to stun lock an enemy, or multiple enemies, makes you a CCer not a tank. Same goes for other forms of control like knockdowns, staggers, sleep, charm, hypnotism, slow, etc.
so lemmie get this straight... if you have aggro of a mob and you keep it knocked down or stunned or slowed the entire fight while either (you-solo) or(another person/people-group) kill it without taking damage your not effectively tanking? you sir should go back to the trinity. just because you dont lose health/hit points doesnt mean your not tanking... people are just to used to every other game making tanking a get hit in the face as much as you can.
FYI- pretty sure crowd control is mutiple mobs taken out of the fight as you control it... i know rogues have a sap and such but im thinking EQ here... not the crap wow made it to be.
CC's are abilities, just as tanking is essentially an ability, tanking isn't just about getting "hit in the face", it's about the ability to maintain aggro off those who can't sustain it, squishy's if you will.
I'm thinking SWG here not WOW, I don't know why you're even bringing up WOW, look at my sig and the games I have experience in (liked).
I'll give you an SWG example, I was a fencer/pistoleer/doc. I had abilities to call aggro, I had abilities to stun, dizzy and snare, I also had abilities to heal those CC effects and dots from my doc trees.
I could change another players posture from standing to kneeling or send them flat on their back with a dizzy effect, making it impossible to stand back up for a period of time. This is crowd control. It could be used on one to multiple targets, in PVE I used it in a group fashion, in PVP on individuals depending on who was a threat. These were all abilities not an act of taking/avoiding damage.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
"Tanking" is just another (rather limited) form of crowd control. Beat on me until my hit points expire, foul beast.
Taunt Mechanics, on the other hand, are a very very powerful form of CC. Full-on mind control, "all these creatures hate me far beyond the actual threat I pose to them"--that's some serious CC.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
"Tanking" is just another (rather limited) form of crowd control. Beat on me until my hit points expire, foul beast.
Taunt Mechanics, on the other hand, are a very very powerful form of CC. Full-on mind control, "all these creatures hate me far beyond the actual threat I pose to them"--that's some serious CC.
Not a bad way to look at it, not fully accurate but in GW2's case it's very much the only form of "tanking" there will be, minus the ability to hold aggro, which negates calling it tanking :P.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Not a bad way to look at it, not fully accurate but in GW2's case it's very much the only form of "tanking" there will be, minus the ability to hold aggro, which negates calling it tanking :P.
Without taunt/threat mechanics, traditional tanking is pretty effectively impossible.
But if you can match that level of crowd control, you can do the same job (hold X critturs while my buddies beat on them), regardless of what you want to label it.
GW's never had that kind of overpowered CC, to my recollection.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
It's really evident that there's a lack of Guild Wars gameplay experience here. Once you play it, it's a paradigm shift, and you begin to understand new things. There are a few games like that. The problem is is that if you haven't played it then you're stuck in old ways of thinking.
Guild Wars 2, like Guild Wars, has been confirmed to not have any form of aggro or taunting. It's a silly mechanic anyway. What... I yell at an ogre in a language they barely understand, I've hurt their feelings, and now they want to see me wiped off the face of the earth, ignoring anyone else nearby? In Guild Wars, mobs made a beeline for those with the lowest armour or health, they picked out the weak of the herd, and the only thing you could do to stop them was interrupt them, stun them, impede their movement, or place obstacles in their way.
There was absolutely no way to 'taunt' them.
If you can't 'taunt' then you can't 'tank' and the reason for this is because the mob doesn't think it should be paying attention to theg uy in plate armour with all the hitpoints. So what you have to do is continually use different skills to keep critters away from your party members, you have to get in their face, you have to hassle them so much that your party member gets of range. Then they may continue to chase anyway, or they may turn and attack you depending on what their AI thinks is tactically best. But you could never control them as you can control mobs with taunting.
It was really a hit and miss thing, and everyone had to work to ensure that mobs did the least amount of damage possible. All that's happening is that this approach is being carried over to Guild Wars 2. Some people at the start are going to think that standing behind a warrior is probably the best protection, following conditioning from other games, but they'll learn. Oh, they'll learn.
It's really evident that there's a lack of Guild Wars gameplay experience here. Once you play it, it's a paradigm shift, and you begin to understand new things. There are a few games like that. The problem is is that if you haven't played it then you're stuck in old ways of thinking.
Guild Wars 2, like Guild Wars, has been confirmed to not have any form of aggro or taunting. It's a silly mechanic anyway. What... I yell at an ogre in a language they barely understand, I've hurt their feelings, and now they want to see me wiped off the face of the earth, ignoring anyone else nearby? In Guild Wars, mobs made a beeline for those with the lowest armour or health, they picked out the weak of the herd, and the only thing you could do to stop them was interrupt them, stun them, impede their movement, or place obstacles in their way.
There was absolutely no way to 'taunt' them.
If you can't 'taunt' then you can't 'tank' and the reason for this is because the mob doesn't think it should be paying attention to theg uy in plate armour with all the hitpoints. So what you have to do is continually use different skills to keep critters away from your party members, you have to get in their face, you have to hassle them so much that your party member gets of range. Then they may continue to chase anyway, or they may turn and attack you depending on what their AI thinks is tactically best. But you could never control them as you can control mobs with taunting.
It was really a hit and miss thing, and everyone had to work to ensure that mobs did the least amount of damage possible. All that's happening is that this approach is being carried over to Guild Wars 2. Some people at the start are going to think that standing behind a warrior is probably the best protection, following conditioning from other games, but they'll learn. Oh, they'll learn.
The massive amount sof rage and QQ will be quite amusing.
... actually, it's probably a GREAT idea to literally stand behind a warrior, if you can convince them to not dodge roll. Intercepted projectiles for the win.
The massive amount sof rage and QQ will be quite amusing.
But not as amusing as GW's Opening Day.
WoW Player: Where's the loot?
GW Player: There's not very much of it, and it doesn't have a huge relative effect on your capabilities anyway.
WoW Player: WTH?? You can't make a game without loot!! That's crazy!
WoW Player: Where's the content?
GW Player: You mean PVE? Didn't you read the box? This is a PvP game with a pretty shallow veneer of PVE just to cap.
WoW Player: WTH?? I want my money back!
WoW Player: What do you mean there's only 20 levels? ::stamping of feet and rage induced screaming::
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
It's really evident that there's a lack of Guild Wars gameplay experience here. Once you play it, it's a paradigm shift, and you begin to understand new things. There are a few games like that. The problem is is that if you haven't played it then you're stuck in old ways of thinking.
Guild Wars 2, like Guild Wars, has been confirmed to not have any form of aggro or taunting. It's a silly mechanic anyway. What... I yell at an ogre in a language they barely understand, I've hurt their feelings, and now they want to see me wiped off the face of the earth, ignoring anyone else nearby? In Guild Wars, mobs made a beeline for those with the lowest armour or health, they picked out the weak of the herd, and the only thing you could do to stop them was interrupt them, stun them, impede their movement, or place obstacles in their way.
There was absolutely no way to 'taunt' them.
If you can't 'taunt' then you can't 'tank' and the reason for this is because the mob doesn't think it should be paying attention to theg uy in plate armour with all the hitpoints. So what you have to do is continually use different skills to keep critters away from your party members, you have to get in their face, you have to hassle them so much that your party member gets of range. Then they may continue to chase anyway, or they may turn and attack you depending on what their AI thinks is tactically best. But you could never control them as you can control mobs with taunting.
It was really a hit and miss thing, and everyone had to work to ensure that mobs did the least amount of damage possible. All that's happening is that this approach is being carried over to Guild Wars 2. Some people at the start are going to think that standing behind a warrior is probably the best protection, following conditioning from other games, but they'll learn. Oh, they'll learn.
To be honest in PVP tanking has really never been an effective form of playing. There's nothing that keeps a player coming at you, GW1 was basically the same thing as typcial PVP, kill the weakest (healers nukers) or more dangerous (Rangers, etc) links first then worry about the high armored or high Hp targets.
This is why I've always felt PVP is a far more interesting field of play.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
GW's never had that kind of overpowered CC, to my recollection.
Well a few classes have abilities to control you, not sure which it was as it's been a while for me, but I recollect one that could completely remove your control over your movement.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
A while ago before some recent changes were made I believe that warriors did the most damage of all classes.
Well I'd hope they changed that, as what would be the point in other classes? Most HP + Most DPS = win every time.
They did change it. The entire point of your last post is moot simply because nothing in the game is final at this time.
This question will be open until we have these facts, how will this be different?
I'm especially curious about this because of their anti-trinity rhetoric. How does it differeniate if there will be typcial RPG class structuring, unless they level the playing field 100% like an FPS would? Giving similar HP, similar DMG, etc..
I fail to see how they can deviate to far from the trinty yet maintain a somewhat balanced environment especially in PVP. Without leveling the play-field. If they're offering class specific differences, it will essentially be a trinity system, as the strength and weakness structuring, will need a balance of some sort. Trinity has always been the answer to that.
It's a bit of a listen, but you should really give the latest episode of GuildCast a listen. In it, the guest Dan, who was a member of the only 5-man team to successfully complete the Press/Fan Day explorable dungeon last month, talks about how class balance and the roles within the group were handled. I can't point you to a specific MM:SS point because he talks about it throughout the whole podcast, but I think what he has to say is enlightening.
In short, he is pretty adamant that the roles as we know them are not filled in the way that many speculate, that healing is not really the life-saving technique that one might expect, and that gameplay changes completely based on who happens to step up to fulfill whatever needs doing at the moment. Yet it seems clear that each class still has its own "feel".
Comments
Nobody has the ability to sit their absorb dmg and keep themselves up. They will have to move effectively and yes in doing so they can keep themselves up. However, there are no MMO's that I can recall that offer a fully proactive method of keeping supporting team members. Also, while some classes may be using these support abilities in proactive methods they will also be switching roles on the fly and dishing out dmg. to enemies and controlling enemies. That is my major point.
And in response to the OP, no HP will not be to a ridiculous point to where it mitigates player skill usage. The game is built for skill being the winning factor in the balancing mechanics. However, certain classes will go about their roles in different manners, a thief could be just as frontline as a warrior but they will do it differently, thus the HP difference. A Warrior isn't going to be as mobile, thus they have more HP because they are more of a blunt force brawling type. In MMA terms, a Warrior is your fighter who stays in the pocket when throwing combinations, instead of being a precision type fighter who throws a combo and moves out, he stays in the pocket and throws with ill will. Yes there will be times he will have to avoid dmg. because he can't just stand there and take it, however he won't be the most mobile about it and will absorb more dmg. than a precision fighter. A precision fighter like the thief, would be one who gets in the pocket launches an assault and moves off to the side or out of the fray, then he will choose to reenter when wisest. This is why there are different HP levels, because it results in different play styles for the different roles assumed by different classes.
I should of made it clear, you answered that as well as a few other people. Thank you /bow
....and then the thread turned clusterfuck lol...
Well, that really depends, nobody can sit there and absorb damage any more or less than they could in other games if you really thinkg about it. Instead of healing back health, instead you mitigate it. A guardian can just block attacks, not taking more damage by doing so, and only being able to achieve this for however long their ability or energy lasts. Then depending on the ability, they could use it again in quick succession, or use an alternate ability utilizing the same properties.
As for proactive methods in other MMOs, I can think of a couple off the top of my head, one being a forcefield defender in CoH, and another being the tank classes in WAR. Some of the tank classes in WAR did exactly what GW2 does where positioning your character in front of your team and utilizing a shield could mitigate damage quite a bit. They also had a feature they are using in SWTOR too where you could place a kind of damage debuff on another player to allow you to soak up some of the damage they receive. Its done similarly in SWTOR -- with some changes of course.
As for switching weapons, its an OPTION that you have, but it doesn't necessarily mean that by switching your weapons you are forced to switch your role entirely. For example, who's to say that you can spec some damage abilities with your sword as a ranger, and then switch so that you have some more damage abilities with your bow? As far as I can tell theres nothing stopping you from doing that, and for a pure damage dealer it might not be a bad idea to have DPS at both ranges.
But of course. It really is par for the course here on mmorpg.com, as well with most other gameing oriented forums. You could talk about bunnies and lemonade and somehow the thread will be turned into a hate filled, mud slinging, finger pointing, intellegence insulting arguement that even politicians will look at and say "damn... thats harsh".
lol
Even among the GW2 fans, I think the only thing we can agree on is, "We would love for the game to be ready and for the game to launch!"
No you're right no healer class, but there is healing. Which will be a communal effort in a sense. You're wrong about people not switching skills up in other MMO's though, in pre-cu SWG depending on a situation there were multiple roles I could fill from melee to range to crowd control to all out tanking in PVP.
As far as healing went in our guild we had no truly dedicated healers just a bunch of hybrids that had some healing ability. It was a group effort to keep each other healed be it health healing or status healing (blinded, dizzy, dots etc..). This is what I meant by it won't be far removed from this, ignore it if you wish, but don't tell me what I've experienced in other games.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Actually what Romanator0 provided was direct sources that answer questions brought up here on the thread. Your questions were answered as well by meowhead and others you just can't seem to read them. I never said we shouldn't discuss things that aren't final. Quite contrary I said I liked hearing peoples opinions since I learn new things. I highlighted it for ya as well. Also as I pointed out I don't have much to add to the topic that hasn't been said. But exploding with your comment "Holy shit I hope someone closes this thread" is a piss poor way to go about a discussion wouldn't you say? Makes it difficult to respond to any comments if you are gonna rage about the answers you get.
RIP Jimmy "The Rev" Sullivan and Paul Gray.
Good point, for me, I like stating what I'm feeling regardless of how on point it is, simply because if I'm wrong I will be corrected. I have no problem with being proven wrong, I actually like being proven wrong as it helps to further understand things I may be confused about. I don't get butt-hurt over it or lash out at those who have a better understanding. Unless of course someone tells me what to talk about
.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Warriors get hit more. Elementalists don't. How is this a bad thing?
you understand that hit points dont mean shit right? whats the difference in missing 2k health a warrior has and the ability of an ele to cast a bubble that absorbs 2k dmg? nothing... trinity isnt coming back... they can do away with it by having different tanking mechanincs for each class... just cuz a warrior has 10k health and 9k armor doesnt mean he is the best "tank". rogues can prolly dodge attacks/have faster health regen abilites/ or even stun lock tank... the options are endless in guild wars... not to mention its not always about absorbing the damage... guild wars is built around preventing the damage... knockdowns,stuns,slows,charms- they're all forms of tanking... just because you dont get hit doesnt mean your not tanking...
From reading the responses in this thread, professions wont get huge boosts to their hit points purely because of their profession.
Knockdowns, stuns, snares and mez's are all forms of crowd control, not tanking. Tanking means to absord the damage, as well as maintain aggro. There's a huge difference there.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
so lemmie get this straight... if you have aggro of a mob and you keep it knocked down or stunned or slowed the entire fight while either (you-solo) or(another person/people-group) kill it without taking damage your not effectively tanking? you sir should go back to the trinity. just because you dont lose health/hit points doesnt mean your not tanking... people are just to used to every other game making tanking a get hit in the face as much as you can.
FYI- pretty sure crowd control is mutiple mobs taken out of the fight as you control it... i know rogues have a sap and such but im thinking EQ here... not the crap wow made it to be.
Actually he was right. Those things are not forms of tanking. They might get the same job done as a tank, but a tank is what we consider our meatshield, the person taking the damage and holding the aggro. Keeping someone stun locked or knocked down is a form of crowd control. Sure they can both stop everyone else from taking damage, but the key difference is a tank is taking damage (wether losing hitpoints or not due to a bubble cast on them, bubbles are damage mitigation, the damage is still there but it is being absorbed) a CCer prevents EVERYONE from taking damage, including themselves. No bubble, armor, or HP required.
GW2 will focus on use of CC and other tactics rather than having a meatshield to take all the damage.
Also, you mentioned a CCer keeping aggro of a mob. Thats another difference between tanking and CC. Tank requires keeping aggro to keep the enemy hitting them and not others. CC doesnt matter who has aggro, youre stopping them from doing any damage. Could be you, a healer, a tank, a dps... doesnt matter who has the aggro if the enemy cant hit anyone.
In response to your FYI Edit: The discussion you wer ehaving was related to only a single mob, but wether its 1 mob or 100, its the same. Tank functions 1 way, CC functions another. Stun locking an enemy is a form of controlling them. The ability to stun lock an enemy, or multiple enemies, makes you a CCer not a tank. Same goes for other forms of control like knockdowns, staggers, sleep, charm, hypnotism, slow, etc.
CC's are abilities, just as tanking is essentially an ability, tanking isn't just about getting "hit in the face", it's about the ability to maintain aggro off those who can't sustain it, squishy's if you will.
I'm thinking SWG here not WOW, I don't know why you're even bringing up WOW, look at my sig and the games I have experience in (liked).
I'll give you an SWG example, I was a fencer/pistoleer/doc. I had abilities to call aggro, I had abilities to stun, dizzy and snare, I also had abilities to heal those CC effects and dots from my doc trees.
I could change another players posture from standing to kneeling or send them flat on their back with a dizzy effect, making it impossible to stand back up for a period of time. This is crowd control. It could be used on one to multiple targets, in PVE I used it in a group fashion, in PVP on individuals depending on who was a threat. These were all abilities not an act of taking/avoiding damage.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
"Tanking" is just another (rather limited) form of crowd control. Beat on me until my hit points expire, foul beast.
Taunt Mechanics, on the other hand, are a very very powerful form of CC. Full-on mind control, "all these creatures hate me far beyond the actual threat I pose to them"--that's some serious CC.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Not a bad way to look at it, not fully accurate but in GW2's case it's very much the only form of "tanking" there will be, minus the ability to hold aggro, which negates calling it tanking :P.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Without taunt/threat mechanics, traditional tanking is pretty effectively impossible.
But if you can match that level of crowd control, you can do the same job (hold X critturs while my buddies beat on them), regardless of what you want to label it.
GW's never had that kind of overpowered CC, to my recollection.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
It's really evident that there's a lack of Guild Wars gameplay experience here. Once you play it, it's a paradigm shift, and you begin to understand new things. There are a few games like that. The problem is is that if you haven't played it then you're stuck in old ways of thinking.
Guild Wars 2, like Guild Wars, has been confirmed to not have any form of aggro or taunting. It's a silly mechanic anyway. What... I yell at an ogre in a language they barely understand, I've hurt their feelings, and now they want to see me wiped off the face of the earth, ignoring anyone else nearby? In Guild Wars, mobs made a beeline for those with the lowest armour or health, they picked out the weak of the herd, and the only thing you could do to stop them was interrupt them, stun them, impede their movement, or place obstacles in their way.
There was absolutely no way to 'taunt' them.
If you can't 'taunt' then you can't 'tank' and the reason for this is because the mob doesn't think it should be paying attention to theg uy in plate armour with all the hitpoints. So what you have to do is continually use different skills to keep critters away from your party members, you have to get in their face, you have to hassle them so much that your party member gets of range. Then they may continue to chase anyway, or they may turn and attack you depending on what their AI thinks is tactically best. But you could never control them as you can control mobs with taunting.
It was really a hit and miss thing, and everyone had to work to ensure that mobs did the least amount of damage possible. All that's happening is that this approach is being carried over to Guild Wars 2. Some people at the start are going to think that standing behind a warrior is probably the best protection, following conditioning from other games, but they'll learn. Oh, they'll learn.
The massive amount sof rage and QQ will be quite amusing.
... actually, it's probably a GREAT idea to literally stand behind a warrior, if you can convince them to not dodge roll. Intercepted projectiles for the win.
But not as amusing as GW's Opening Day.
WoW Player: Where's the loot?
GW Player: There's not very much of it, and it doesn't have a huge relative effect on your capabilities anyway.
WoW Player: WTH?? You can't make a game without loot!! That's crazy!
WoW Player: Where's the content?
GW Player: You mean PVE? Didn't you read the box? This is a PvP game with a pretty shallow veneer of PVE just to cap.
WoW Player: WTH?? I want my money back!
WoW Player: What do you mean there's only 20 levels? ::stamping of feet and rage induced screaming::
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
To be honest in PVP tanking has really never been an effective form of playing. There's nothing that keeps a player coming at you, GW1 was basically the same thing as typcial PVP, kill the weakest (healers nukers) or more dangerous (Rangers, etc) links first then worry about the high armored or high Hp targets.
This is why I've always felt PVP is a far more interesting field of play.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Well a few classes have abilities to control you, not sure which it was as it's been a while for me, but I recollect one that could completely remove your control over your movement.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
It's a bit of a listen, but you should really give the latest episode of GuildCast a listen. In it, the guest Dan, who was a member of the only 5-man team to successfully complete the Press/Fan Day explorable dungeon last month, talks about how class balance and the roles within the group were handled. I can't point you to a specific MM:SS point because he talks about it throughout the whole podcast, but I think what he has to say is enlightening.
In short, he is pretty adamant that the roles as we know them are not filled in the way that many speculate, that healing is not really the life-saving technique that one might expect, and that gameplay changes completely based on who happens to step up to fulfill whatever needs doing at the moment. Yet it seems clear that each class still has its own "feel".