All you EQ1 vets, who are complaining about the 8 abilities (gasp)...
EQ1 had only 8 abilities locked in UI also. I had forgotten this myself until I looked at a photo of my old UI. I was a wizard, and I could pull spells in and out from my spellbook. This sounds to me exactly how it is going to be in EQNEXT. I actually feel better about the entire thing.
All you EQ1 vets, who are complaining about the 8 abilities (gasp)...
EQ1 had only 8 abilities locked in UI also. I had forgotten this myself until I looked at a photo of my old UI. I was a wizard, and I could pull spells in and out from my spellbook. This sounds to me exactly how it is going to be in EQNEXT. I actually feel better about the entire thing.
I don't mind the 8 ability only part, rather the opposite I am looking forward to it. As for a trinity system I for one liked being pigeonholed into the tank spot, I am friggen downright awesome at it and enjoy the role. What my major concern with is that it's going to be way too easy, and that will leave the feeling of accomplishment for anything empty.
The cartoonish Kerran is a disgrace and if allowed by the gamers to remain than it will just continue to carry through to every other aspect of the game, that needs to be nipped ASAP.
I will never understand why people think one guy standing there taking all the dmg, one person healing them, and everyone else killing the mobs is good combat...it's boring combat. I'm not saying the GW2 system is perfect all the time either. But I appreciate the fact that companies are experimenting and trying new things rather than sticking with a really lame concept.
People always talk about immersion, how is there anything immersive about that? In what even semi-realistic combat situation would this ever happen?
I don't know how many of you fruitcakes have ever been in a real fight, but 20 years of in the US army infantry and good old fashion bar brawls has taught me, that when someone big is in your face, taunting you, you don't turn your back on him to run to the other side of the room to hit the limp wrist tossing beer bottles, because that big guy will choke the shit out of you the minute you take your eyes off him. If hes the one protecting the beer bottle throwing douche, well good luck leaping over that big guy, hes gonna F U UP the minute you try.
Lots of MMOs have used taunts in PvP to great effect.
All armys have had foot soldiers for a reason, just like pawns in chess.... They hold the line.
Now real smart AI would include physics that forced you to move around objects and people not just go through them and HULK leap over them.
And quit calling this system Multi-Class and call it what it is, Out Of Combat Class-swapping system. TSW already has this, and it get real boring. TSW uses a system that is far more customizable. GW2 is also boring (the game is almost dead)
Please (for all you GW2 heroes) do not mistake Rolling left to avoid a giant red spot on the ground for skill or difficulty... Because it is not difficult to double tap.
What does take skill.. is to run around with 20 abilities and still pick the right one, while actually fearing death because it means something.
The smartest AI is PvP and Tanks and healers brought depth to pvp... protect the healer or we all die, find the healer and kill him... Tank taunt the shit out of that rouge before he kills the mage.... Ranger send the pet in.... occupie the tank... ah man.. the good times (gone now)..
Now we have Range , kite, kite, hide, run their zurging, get to our spawn and ZERG back, DPS DPS DPS, no more skill, just ZURG. the worst part is it has taken over PvE also, ZURG, why not, no one dies and if they do so what... just respawn and come back there is no penalty.
I will never understand why people think one guy standing there taking all the dmg, one person healing them, and everyone else killing the mobs is good combat...it's boring combat. I'm not saying the GW2 system is perfect all the time either. But I appreciate the fact that companies are experimenting and trying new things rather than sticking with a really lame concept.
People always talk about immersion, how is there anything immersive about that? In what even semi-realistic combat situation would this ever happen?
This is a strawman argument. No one is saying that we must have Tank/Healer/DPS trinity to enjoy the game (OK, maybe a few people are saying it). What we are saying is that we want defined roles, and we want those roles to focus on other things than DPS. When they say "everyone is going to have to DPS or your group will be wondering what you're doing"... I mean, how else can you interpret that? You take a game like Everquest, where you have a wide range of roles, from healer, to crowd control, to damage, to damage mitigation/buffing, to aggro management. Now you have a game where your role, as stated by the developers in the panel, is to DPS. You may have some areas of specialization, where you can do some crowd control, or do some healing, but you're going to be primarily built around doing damage to the enemies.
I am all for new gameplay, but not failed design choices. Saying "there weren't enough clerics in EQ and WoW, so the only solution is to make everyone heal himself", is a fallacy. Just make the clerics more fun to play, and then more people will play clerics. Players are like water, they play the path of least resistance. That's why you have games with 5:1 ratio of DPS to tanks and healers, not because of any "it is more fun to play DPS" decision, but because they make the PVE (and probably PVP) content easier for the DPS classes to do.
It was this way 14 years ago where Druids and Necros were the most popular class in EQ, because they could solo, and it's this way today.
Originally posted by Riposte.This Why does every game have the same fucking warrior class. If I see another Whirlwind ability on a fighter class I'm going to go on a rampage
That's like saying your gonna rampage if you see one more wizard class using fireball, both are very iconic to their classes.
I presume the main reason for the 8 skill limit is for the console players with their limited button on the controller.
Unfortunately i think this presumption is spot on.
Sadly I agree. Which means most likely bad UI limitations so they can make their PS4 port.
The severe limitations on skills is one thing that may make this game a short timer for me.
Yes, it's all a console player conspiracy to kill mmos. Lets all ignore the fact that you could just macro the hell out of everything anyways. Or the added emphasis on movement and positioning rather than standing still and spamming a pre-memorized rotation that someone else came up with and you just read about on a wiki.
I will never understand why people think one guy standing there taking all the dmg, one person healing them, and everyone else killing the mobs is good combat...it's boring combat. I'm not saying the GW2 system is perfect all the time either. But I appreciate the fact that companies are experimenting and trying new things rather than sticking with a really lame concept.
People always talk about immersion, how is there anything immersive about that? In what even semi-realistic combat situation would this ever happen?
This is a strawman argument. No one is saying that we must have Tank/Healer/DPS trinity to enjoy the game (OK, maybe a few people are saying it). What we are saying is that we want defined roles, and we want those roles to focus on other things than DPS. When they say "everyone is going to have to DPS or your group will be wondering what you're doing"... I mean, how else can you interpret that? You take a game like Everquest, where you have a wide range of roles, from healer, to crowd control, to damage, to damage mitigation/buffing, to aggro management. Now you have a game where your role, as stated by the developers in the panel, is to DPS. You may have some areas of specialization, where you can do some crowd control, or do some healing, but you're going to be primarily built around doing damage to the enemies.
I am all for new gameplay, but not failed design choices. Saying "there weren't enough clerics in EQ and WoW, so the only solution is to make everyone heal himself", is a fallacy. Just make the clerics more fun to play, and then more people will play clerics. Players are like water, they play the path of least resistance. That's why you have games with 5:1 ratio of DPS to tanks and healers, not because of any "it is more fun to play DPS" decision, but because they make the PVE (and probably PVP) content easier for the DPS classes to do.
It was this way 14 years ago where Druids and Necros were the most popular class in EQ, because they could solo, and it's this way today.
every argument here has fallacy within it.. although your argument may be somewhat true.. not every gamer plays to play a spread sheet.. some may be like me and play mmo's because they are to closest thing to playing out the stories and lore you were immersed in when reading many adventure and fantasy themed books.... and sorry to say.. not many of those books employed the trinity as everyone here knows it in combat mechanics...
also... if you look at the typical adventurer in these stories.. it is some variation of dps.... ppl don't only play dps because its easy.. they play dps because dps classes are more fun and are cooler... if not.. why are ninjas/pirates and other chars created by the media so popular.... if tanks and mages are so popular.. why do ppl not make tv shows/anime/cartoons/books focusing on the healers and tanks... seems like no one wants them... money talks
So the statement we could mix and match skills to play as we want to wasn't completely true. There's a shock. If I want to use 3 utility skills, but the class I'm playing only has one utility slot, as I'm reading this write-up I would only be able to use 1 utility skill meaning I can't play the way I want to play.
___________________________ Have flask; will travel.
Originally posted by SuraknarWe BETTER have enough Inventory space for being able to carry different weapons and possibly Gear for all these Classes that we collect and can swap to and from.I am sick and tired of games that limit Inventory Space.
It sounds like we need an army of mules to carry all taht stuff behind us !
And thats another part of the issue with some of the player base. Everyone feels obligated to have to fill every nook and cranny if given the freedom to do so when the whole point EQ is designing a system like this is to fulfill a single archetype that matches the player themselves and allow them to change from time to time, I imagine when you have access to a bank. Again, players like this are simple minded and need to get over the whole trying to game the system all the time (minning/maxing etc. etc.). Its about providing an experience, creating an environment, allowing players to feel their character is where they want to exactly be at, making player actions feel meaningful etc. etc.
In regards to the uses of taunt and the practicality of the trinity, in any kind of lore it makes zero sense for anybody to attack the most heavily armored, least damaging character. Just because its a game doesn't mean it should be used as an excuse to not evolve the systems. Its an archaic form of group play and it was used because there wasn't any other options at the time. I agree that combat should be positional and reactive, not the silly min/maxing gear and generating a silly threat meter.
And we wonder why these companies lack "innovation" but when a company actually tries to do something, many cry foul and want the systems that are already there. Guess what? If you want the holy trinity, play a game that has the holy trinity, there's a lot more choices for that style of game play and not enough of the others. Don't ruin the genre because you feel entitled to every new game that comes out when there are games that already employ this system perfectly well.
Originally posted by SuraknarWe BETTER have enough Inventory space for being able to carry different weapons and possibly Gear for all these Classes that we collect and can swap to and from.I am sick and tired of games that limit Inventory Space.
It sounds like we need an army of mules to carry all taht stuff behind us !
And thats another part of the issue with some of the player base. Everyone feels obligated to have to fill every nook and cranny if given the freedom to do so when the whole point EQ is designing a system like this is to fulfill a single archetype that matches the player themselves and allow them to change from time to time, I imagine when you have access to a bank. Again, players like this are simple minded and need to get over the whole trying to game the system all the time (minning/maxing etc. etc.). Its about providing an experience, creating an environment, allowing players to feel their character is where they want to exactly be at, making player actions feel meaningful etc. etc.
In regards to the uses of taunt and the practicality of the trinity, in any kind of lore it makes zero sense for anybody to attack the most heavily armored, least damaging character. Just because its a game doesn't mean it should be used as an excuse to not evolve the systems. Its an archaic form of group play and it was used because there wasn't any other options at the time. I agree that combat should be positional and reactive, not the silly min/maxing gear and generating a silly threat meter.
And we wonder why these companies lack "innovation" but when a company actually tries to do something, many cry foul and want the systems that are already there. Guess what? If you want the holy trinity, play a game that has the holy trinity, there's a lot more choices for that style of game play and not enough of the others. Don't ruin the genre because you feel entitled to every new game that comes out when there are games that already employ this system perfectly well.
I completely agree.. in a fantasy setting everyone fights... everyone dodges.. and they make use of the surroundings to come out of the fight as the victors.
Any word mentioned about passive abilities, buffs and potions and how those work or if they take up an ability slot at the expense of an activated skill?
Also, any word on gear and how it'll affect your character. I got the impression that your weapon will have different abilities based on class, but are weapons and armour class restricted or is it an anything goes like in TESO?
I find it funny that the reason stated for only 8 abilities was so we would not be playing our UIs, but what will end up happening is we will be playing our inventories and skill swaps.
Also, in EQ, there were more than 8 skills at a time, depending on the class. Sure casters only had the 8 gem slots, but could forget and memorize quickly, even while in combat, where this sounds like you have to be out of combat.
Also, my character was a ranger. I had the 8 spells, plus my skills, of attack, kick, track, sneak, forage, disarm, etc. Not even counting passives which I'm not sure EQN is counting or not. Then getting into the disciplines later on, and AAs that were activated, there were a lot more than just 8 skills allowed. The skills bars could be scrolled through pages to use them if you had need. It was just the spells limited to 8.
Dajag made a great point too about fights in real life. People say it is unrealistic for someone to stay put fighting the guy in front instead of running after the guy throwing things at him, but that is crazy lol. Running after that other guy is just begging for a beat down. Best bet is to make quick work of the big guy and cause the others to panic and disperse.
Sometimes in games, the mobs would run after the caster, and not just attack the tank. The melee would just follow it beating the crap out of it while the caster ran in circles. If you think about it, the mob would have had better luck just trying to kill the warrior in front of it, then mopping up the more fragile classes instead of doing no damage to anyone.
.... Dajag made a great point too about fights in real life. People say it is unrealistic for someone to stay put fighting the guy in front instead of running after the guy throwing things at him, but that is crazy lol. Running after that other guy is just begging for a beat down. Best bet is to make quick work of the big guy and cause the others to panic and disperse.
Sometimes in games, the mobs would run after the caster, and not just attack the tank. The melee would just follow it beating the crap out of it while the caster ran in circles. If you think about it, the mob would have had better luck just trying to kill the warrior in front of it, then mopping up the more fragile classes instead of doing no damage to anyone.
It's a terrible analogy, because its unrealistic to think there is a guy that is "throwing things at you" because they don't exist in real life fights because no one is throwing things at people over and over again in fight or if you want to translate "caster" into real life, he would be holding a gun and will be the much bigger threat than an unarmed tough guy in the front. The bigger threat is always the priority in any type of fight and generally you would target the thing that would potentially do more damage. You wouldn't want to "focus" the tough guy because he's big and can take damage, you would focus him its because he's the biggest threat currently until someone pulls a gun or a knife.
This is not the case in the trinity when you play tank. Tanks are actually the lowest priority target because they generally do lower damage than DPS and are much harder to kill. Thats why they had to invent an abritrary threat system or else the whole thing wouldn't work. It was a cheap way to create roles in the early days. It worked for its time but its beyond played out after over a decade of use.
Again, whats the point of creating a game that utilizes the trinity when there are other games that have polished this type of system and created large amounts of encounters specifically for this. Newer games shouldn't be using the same systems over and over again or else the genre will never progress. It's like reinventing the wheel.
OKay this game has my undivided attention. Graphics cool, destruction cooler, limitless amount of classes coolest. Im not hearing any controller support probably wont either, but if they are aiming at the PS4 and Xbobx One, they the PC should see some controller support. And don't tell me they are not aiming at the consoles, they are way too much of a profitable market to miss out on, And don't tell me to go buy a console, really don't want to waste more money on something I hardly really play on.
Originally posted by SuraknarWe BETTER have enough Inventory space for being able to carry different weapons and possibly Gear for all these Classes that we collect and can swap to and from.I am sick and tired of games that limit Inventory Space.
It sounds like we need an army of mules to carry all taht stuff behind us !
And thats another part of the issue with some of the player base. Everyone feels obligated to have to fill every nook and cranny if given the freedom to do so when the whole point EQ is designing a system like this is to fulfill a single archetype that matches the player themselves and allow them to change from time to time, I imagine when you have access to a bank. Again, players like this are simple minded and need to get over the whole trying to game the system all the time (minning/maxing etc. etc.). Its about providing an experience, creating an environment, allowing players to feel their character is where they want to exactly be at, making player actions feel meaningful etc. etc.
In regards to the uses of taunt and the practicality of the trinity, in any kind of lore it makes zero sense for anybody to attack the most heavily armored, least damaging character. Just because its a game doesn't mean it should be used as an excuse to not evolve the systems. Its an archaic form of group play and it was used because there wasn't any other options at the time. I agree that combat should be positional and reactive, not the silly min/maxing gear and generating a silly threat meter.
And we wonder why these companies lack "innovation" but when a company actually tries to do something, many cry foul and want the systems that are already there. Guess what? If you want the holy trinity, play a game that has the holy trinity, there's a lot more choices for that style of game play and not enough of the others. Don't ruin the genre because you feel entitled to every new game that comes out when there are games that already employ this system perfectly well.
I suspect they give u muiltipal saved classes/builds and all, each has the abilitys for that class alogn with the equipment that it uses whcih will be outside of the invenoty kinda like a secondary paper doll type thing. So when u switch roles it automaticly changes out the armor for that role u had saved or somthing along those lines i would think.
Originally posted by BillMurphy From what I can gather about the trinity, is at least in a sense it'll still be there. Just not as heavily as say, EQ1. You can still play a tank, a healer, etc. They're just not going to pigeonhole you into those roles as much. I might be wrong, but that's how I'm taking the information on how classes work. You get access to all the skills of every class, and you can effectively choose your own role at any given time.
thats the impression i got too
we need more info to clarify this, what are tank skills? what are healer skills?
Some people are just not seeing the full possibilities of this game. It has already been stated that you can, and will use your environment in battle. If you can redo your skills to put up earth wall, use druid like vines to stop mobs in their tracks, cause nettle like spike on your body that damage the monster every time it hits you, and put up the mage's invulnerability shield, you are effectively a TANK. You become the focus of the attacks because the mobs can't move to attack anyone else, you do your normal weapon damage, they get damaged every time they hit you, and you cannot get hurt. You become a tank without the need for taunts.
Similar combinations of skills can be made so certain people can fufulll different roles as they see fit.
Also, would those GW2 fanatics stop comparing this game to GW2, it is NOTHING like GW2. In GW2, skills are tied to your level & Class, not to your exploration, where you unlock classes with their own set of skills; your actions have outcomes in the progress of the whole server, and your story is not the same if you wanted to start a new character with the exact same race and starting class; battle does not involve zerging, and the main focus of the game is NOT PvP with a themepark attached like GW2. If you squint really hard, you can try to say that because you saw some red circles on the floor, this has some similarities to GW2, but then I can say that about TERA, and it was release BEFORE GW2... so I guess GW2 is just a reskinned TERA by your logic. Action style combat does not make a game "like GW2", there were many other games before GW2 that had this (Vindictus, C9, RaiderZ), and many more came after it as well.
Originally posted by Riposte.This Why does every game have the same fucking warrior class. If I see another Whirlwind ability on a fighter class I'm going to go on a rampage
haha, no kidding. Though with the number of classes that there are it's probably just inevitable that these "iconic" (read: banal) abilities had to have popped up somewhere. That they may have stuck them all on one class is probably just a way for them to keep the older and younger ends of the player base from getting scared and confused.
Originally posted by BillMurphy From what I can gather about the trinity, is at least in a sense it'll still be there. Just not as heavily as say, EQ1. You can still play a tank, a healer, etc. They're just not going to pigeonhole you into those roles as much. I might be wrong, but that's how I'm taking the information on how classes work. You get access to all the skills of every class, and you can effectively choose your own role at any given time.
You're wrong and they said as much. They didn't say "we'll have Trinity, but you can play multiple parts of the trinity (ala Rift)" they said "there's no dedicated healing and we won't use the taunt mechanic".
actually at the EQN Debut Streaming they said exactly that "Trinity is there"
Comments
All you EQ1 vets, who are complaining about the 8 abilities (gasp)...
EQ1 had only 8 abilities locked in UI also. I had forgotten this myself until I looked at a photo of my old UI. I was a wizard, and I could pull spells in and out from my spellbook. This sounds to me exactly how it is going to be in EQNEXT. I actually feel better about the entire thing.
I'm sad about no tanks/healer/support. I quit gw2 in less then a month. Perhaps you can't teach us old EQ dogs new tricks...
On a side note. I bet there will be passives that work into class building as well as the 4 in 4.
I don't mind the 8 ability only part, rather the opposite I am looking forward to it. As for a trinity system I for one liked being pigeonholed into the tank spot, I am friggen downright awesome at it and enjoy the role. What my major concern with is that it's going to be way too easy, and that will leave the feeling of accomplishment for anything empty.
The cartoonish Kerran is a disgrace and if allowed by the gamers to remain than it will just continue to carry through to every other aspect of the game, that needs to be nipped ASAP.
I will never understand why people think one guy standing there taking all the dmg, one person healing them, and everyone else killing the mobs is good combat...it's boring combat. I'm not saying the GW2 system is perfect all the time either. But I appreciate the fact that companies are experimenting and trying new things rather than sticking with a really lame concept.
People always talk about immersion, how is there anything immersive about that? In what even semi-realistic combat situation would this ever happen?
I don't know how many of you fruitcakes have ever been in a real fight, but 20 years of in the US army infantry and good old fashion bar brawls has taught me, that when someone big is in your face, taunting you, you don't turn your back on him to run to the other side of the room to hit the limp wrist tossing beer bottles, because that big guy will choke the shit out of you the minute you take your eyes off him. If hes the one protecting the beer bottle throwing douche, well good luck leaping over that big guy, hes gonna F U UP the minute you try.
Lots of MMOs have used taunts in PvP to great effect.
All armys have had foot soldiers for a reason, just like pawns in chess.... They hold the line.
Now real smart AI would include physics that forced you to move around objects and people not just go through them and HULK leap over them.
And quit calling this system Multi-Class and call it what it is, Out Of Combat Class-swapping system. TSW already has this, and it get real boring. TSW uses a system that is far more customizable. GW2 is also boring (the game is almost dead)
Please (for all you GW2 heroes) do not mistake Rolling left to avoid a giant red spot on the ground for skill or difficulty... Because it is not difficult to double tap.
What does take skill.. is to run around with 20 abilities and still pick the right one, while actually fearing death because it means something.
The smartest AI is PvP and Tanks and healers brought depth to pvp... protect the healer or we all die, find the healer and kill him... Tank taunt the shit out of that rouge before he kills the mage.... Ranger send the pet in.... occupie the tank... ah man.. the good times (gone now)..
Now we have Range , kite, kite, hide, run their zurging, get to our spawn and ZERG back, DPS DPS DPS, no more skill, just ZURG. the worst part is it has taken over PvE also, ZURG, why not, no one dies and if they do so what... just respawn and come back there is no penalty.
This is a strawman argument. No one is saying that we must have Tank/Healer/DPS trinity to enjoy the game (OK, maybe a few people are saying it). What we are saying is that we want defined roles, and we want those roles to focus on other things than DPS. When they say "everyone is going to have to DPS or your group will be wondering what you're doing"... I mean, how else can you interpret that? You take a game like Everquest, where you have a wide range of roles, from healer, to crowd control, to damage, to damage mitigation/buffing, to aggro management. Now you have a game where your role, as stated by the developers in the panel, is to DPS. You may have some areas of specialization, where you can do some crowd control, or do some healing, but you're going to be primarily built around doing damage to the enemies.
I am all for new gameplay, but not failed design choices. Saying "there weren't enough clerics in EQ and WoW, so the only solution is to make everyone heal himself", is a fallacy. Just make the clerics more fun to play, and then more people will play clerics. Players are like water, they play the path of least resistance. That's why you have games with 5:1 ratio of DPS to tanks and healers, not because of any "it is more fun to play DPS" decision, but because they make the PVE (and probably PVP) content easier for the DPS classes to do.
It was this way 14 years ago where Druids and Necros were the most popular class in EQ, because they could solo, and it's this way today.
That's like saying your gonna rampage if you see one more wizard class using fireball, both are very iconic to their classes.
Yes, it's all a console player conspiracy to kill mmos. Lets all ignore the fact that you could just macro the hell out of everything anyways. Or the added emphasis on movement and positioning rather than standing still and spamming a pre-memorized rotation that someone else came up with and you just read about on a wiki.
every argument here has fallacy within it.. although your argument may be somewhat true.. not every gamer plays to play a spread sheet.. some may be like me and play mmo's because they are to closest thing to playing out the stories and lore you were immersed in when reading many adventure and fantasy themed books.... and sorry to say.. not many of those books employed the trinity as everyone here knows it in combat mechanics...
also... if you look at the typical adventurer in these stories.. it is some variation of dps.... ppl don't only play dps because its easy.. they play dps because dps classes are more fun and are cooler... if not.. why are ninjas/pirates and other chars created by the media so popular.... if tanks and mages are so popular.. why do ppl not make tv shows/anime/cartoons/books focusing on the healers and tanks... seems like no one wants them... money talks
___________________________
Have flask; will travel.
And thats another part of the issue with some of the player base. Everyone feels obligated to have to fill every nook and cranny if given the freedom to do so when the whole point EQ is designing a system like this is to fulfill a single archetype that matches the player themselves and allow them to change from time to time, I imagine when you have access to a bank. Again, players like this are simple minded and need to get over the whole trying to game the system all the time (minning/maxing etc. etc.). Its about providing an experience, creating an environment, allowing players to feel their character is where they want to exactly be at, making player actions feel meaningful etc. etc.
In regards to the uses of taunt and the practicality of the trinity, in any kind of lore it makes zero sense for anybody to attack the most heavily armored, least damaging character. Just because its a game doesn't mean it should be used as an excuse to not evolve the systems. Its an archaic form of group play and it was used because there wasn't any other options at the time. I agree that combat should be positional and reactive, not the silly min/maxing gear and generating a silly threat meter.
And we wonder why these companies lack "innovation" but when a company actually tries to do something, many cry foul and want the systems that are already there. Guess what? If you want the holy trinity, play a game that has the holy trinity, there's a lot more choices for that style of game play and not enough of the others. Don't ruin the genre because you feel entitled to every new game that comes out when there are games that already employ this system perfectly well.
I completely agree.. in a fantasy setting everyone fights... everyone dodges.. and they make use of the surroundings to come out of the fight as the victors.
Any word mentioned about passive abilities, buffs and potions and how those work or if they take up an ability slot at the expense of an activated skill?
Also, any word on gear and how it'll affect your character. I got the impression that your weapon will have different abilities based on class, but are weapons and armour class restricted or is it an anything goes like in TESO?
I find it funny that the reason stated for only 8 abilities was so we would not be playing our UIs, but what will end up happening is we will be playing our inventories and skill swaps.
Also, in EQ, there were more than 8 skills at a time, depending on the class. Sure casters only had the 8 gem slots, but could forget and memorize quickly, even while in combat, where this sounds like you have to be out of combat.
Also, my character was a ranger. I had the 8 spells, plus my skills, of attack, kick, track, sneak, forage, disarm, etc. Not even counting passives which I'm not sure EQN is counting or not. Then getting into the disciplines later on, and AAs that were activated, there were a lot more than just 8 skills allowed. The skills bars could be scrolled through pages to use them if you had need. It was just the spells limited to 8.
Dajag made a great point too about fights in real life. People say it is unrealistic for someone to stay put fighting the guy in front instead of running after the guy throwing things at him, but that is crazy lol. Running after that other guy is just begging for a beat down. Best bet is to make quick work of the big guy and cause the others to panic and disperse.
Sometimes in games, the mobs would run after the caster, and not just attack the tank. The melee would just follow it beating the crap out of it while the caster ran in circles. If you think about it, the mob would have had better luck just trying to kill the warrior in front of it, then mopping up the more fragile classes instead of doing no damage to anyone.
"The fun exam"
So what you are tellng me is that in the days of old classes weren't designed to be fun?:/
Ugh........
It's a terrible analogy, because its unrealistic to think there is a guy that is "throwing things at you" because they don't exist in real life fights because no one is throwing things at people over and over again in fight or if you want to translate "caster" into real life, he would be holding a gun and will be the much bigger threat than an unarmed tough guy in the front. The bigger threat is always the priority in any type of fight and generally you would target the thing that would potentially do more damage. You wouldn't want to "focus" the tough guy because he's big and can take damage, you would focus him its because he's the biggest threat currently until someone pulls a gun or a knife.
This is not the case in the trinity when you play tank. Tanks are actually the lowest priority target because they generally do lower damage than DPS and are much harder to kill. Thats why they had to invent an abritrary threat system or else the whole thing wouldn't work. It was a cheap way to create roles in the early days. It worked for its time but its beyond played out after over a decade of use.
Again, whats the point of creating a game that utilizes the trinity when there are other games that have polished this type of system and created large amounts of encounters specifically for this. Newer games shouldn't be using the same systems over and over again or else the genre will never progress. It's like reinventing the wheel.
I quite like the sound of this..
Still no pvp info yet..
I suspect they give u muiltipal saved classes/builds and all, each has the abilitys for that class alogn with the equipment that it uses whcih will be outside of the invenoty kinda like a secondary paper doll type thing. So when u switch roles it automaticly changes out the armor for that role u had saved or somthing along those lines i would think.
Belittling the Tank role to a single ability like Taunt is disheartening.
Have your imaginations become so stale people?
"The problem with quotes from the Internet is that it's almost impossible to validate their authenticity." - Abraham Lincoln
thats the impression i got too
we need more info to clarify this, what are tank skills? what are healer skills?
EQ2 fan sites
Some people are just not seeing the full possibilities of this game. It has already been stated that you can, and will use your environment in battle. If you can redo your skills to put up earth wall, use druid like vines to stop mobs in their tracks, cause nettle like spike on your body that damage the monster every time it hits you, and put up the mage's invulnerability shield, you are effectively a TANK. You become the focus of the attacks because the mobs can't move to attack anyone else, you do your normal weapon damage, they get damaged every time they hit you, and you cannot get hurt. You become a tank without the need for taunts.
Similar combinations of skills can be made so certain people can fufulll different roles as they see fit.
Also, would those GW2 fanatics stop comparing this game to GW2, it is NOTHING like GW2. In GW2, skills are tied to your level & Class, not to your exploration, where you unlock classes with their own set of skills; your actions have outcomes in the progress of the whole server, and your story is not the same if you wanted to start a new character with the exact same race and starting class; battle does not involve zerging, and the main focus of the game is NOT PvP with a themepark attached like GW2. If you squint really hard, you can try to say that because you saw some red circles on the floor, this has some similarities to GW2, but then I can say that about TERA, and it was release BEFORE GW2... so I guess GW2 is just a reskinned TERA by your logic. Action style combat does not make a game "like GW2", there were many other games before GW2 that had this (Vindictus, C9, RaiderZ), and many more came after it as well.
haha, no kidding. Though with the number of classes that there are it's probably just inevitable that these "iconic" (read: banal) abilities had to have popped up somewhere. That they may have stuck them all on one class is probably just a way for them to keep the older and younger ends of the player base from getting scared and confused.
actually at the EQN Debut Streaming they said exactly that "Trinity is there"