Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Combat information
Lord.Bachus
Member RarePosts: 9,686
When i heared at the intial presentation at SOE live about the combat system with only 8 skills and no trinity i lost interest in the game...
as i understood back then,there are 4 skills tied to the weapons and the other 4 skills need to be choosen from a predefined cluster (offensive, defensive, support e.o ) where class defines which clusters are tied to each of these 4 buttons.. And tough you can have all skills from all classes, the chosen system felt totally restricted.
So did they release any new information about the actuall skills system? Announcing more about the depth?
- will there be CDs?
- will there be resources involved?
- what tactical and strategical layers will replace the depth of the systems they throw out of the window?
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
Comments
They have mentioned stamina/energy or some sort of resource that will limit skill usage. Gear will effect this as well, allowing for more options.
No word on cool downs that I've seen.
Roles will still be important. Less focus on being good at a particular class and more on being a good player in general.
Classes are meant to be changed frequently to fit the need of a situation. One fight might need a lot of offense, next might need more healing/support, next might need a wall of defenders.
I envision something like moba+DAoC pvp will a lot of focus on teamwork and communication. You can mentally check out in a trinity system, not do much in moba/pvp.
You obviously never played GW2... classes i played had like 30 skills available the way i set them up..
And even in GW2 the reduced freedom of choice was my biggest complaint... but in EQN , they really really overdid themselves by reducing freedom and trying to controll things in their proposed skillbar system..
What i dont get is how EQN and also into some form TESO are trying to step away from trinity, since GW2 has proven that removing a tactical and a strategical layer as can be found in the trinity does not work well for group play...
The combat system of the future still works with roles, but forces players to switch roles based on whats happening, so every player could for instance switch between 3 roles on the fly if the gameplay required it...
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
Yep!
10 skills on bar in GW2, swap weapons for 15 total. EQN it is 8 and 12. Not counting class specific skills.
They have hinted at spellsweaving and combos. So I think there will be more to combat then mashing 8 buttons. Gear also plays in and has procs/passive abilities and maybe active skills.
Being stuck as one class or having to make an alt and redo content over and over is more restricting then multi-classing to me.
Think of each class and a sub class or play style. You are meant to change classes per the situation. Should never be bored or feel like your doing the same thing over and over. While you can stick to one class, it defeats the purpose of playing EQN to me. There will be at least 80 weapon sets and hundreds and hundreds of skills to work with.
GW2 is its own game. Classes are self sufficient DPS-self healing/rezing machines. No indication that EQN will be this way. Throw in shallow dumb AI encounters and you have little need for teamwork, even though it does help even in GW2.
EQN will have roles and most likely will require more teamwork and communication then a trinity system as it is less simple then tank taunt, healer heal, dps kill. Players will need to be actively participating and watching the fight, not health/threat meters.
Trinity system is dated and doesn't allow a huge variety of encounters, even with 50 people, it still boils down to a few particular roles. EQN's system will hopefully provide a much larger variety of content. Class and group makeups will hopefully change fight to fight and allow everyone to stay entertained.
Defense with shields in front keeping mobs away from healers/support in back, DPS/CC running around taking shots when possible?
Watch some old DAoC pvp vids of organized groups vs zergs. I'm not big into moba but from the lol vids I've watch, I get the comparison as well.
Communication, tactics, craziness > set "structure". Combat should be chaotic and surprising and keep you on your toes. Not figure out the exact steps to win (hello YouTube) and just mindlessly do the same thing over and over.
While I don't know how I will like the new system in EQN because its similar to GW2. I did prefer the EQ system which I think had only 8 or 10 action buttons. Its been so long that I don't remember. Back in EQ you had a limited amount of hot bar space and the player had to choose what spells they wanted to load for what encounter. That type of choice is very cool letting the player decided what might or might not be usefull for each encounter. The games these days with so many abilities you can possible even use them with out macros. Don't even get me started about macros lol.
WTF, seriously? We must have been looking at the wrong threads then. That thread was not about how the game has no trinity, but more about how trinity was rethought in this game.
No-trinity is used as to mean, no interdependency on other classes to succeed. This is not what is meant by no trinity in EQNext. EQNext will have exhaustive interdependencies among the different skills available among different classes.
Lets start simple: they did mention there is going to be resource management, and skill chains for successful play. For example, it was stated that you could pick an area of effect move from one class, couple it with a mana drain skill from another class, and a distance shortening move from a third class. You could NOT do these moves in succession with the energy pool of your current class alone, but if you equip a talisman that increases your base energy, you could then perform these moves in quick succession, and effectively make a "mage killing build". This does not mean that you can now take on a dungeon on your own... there are more than just mages in a dungeon. Switching weapons will not redo your skill load out, as they have stated that while you CAN switch weapons, it might not be beneficial due to the current load outs you have. There are no skillsets associated with a weapon you choose to equip that will populate your skill bar the moment you switch weapons as another poster was hinting at.
Second, interdependency play is going to be very much needed in this game, per developer speech, but you will not be FORCED to use the classic trinity. Meaning, you will not HAVE to have a typical meat-shield tank that throws insults about to get the attention of enemies, a healer that makes sure the meat shield doesn't die, and a strict damage dealer that is only focused on pew pew pew... The "Tank" role, will now be more of the "damage control" style. This can be either through crowd control (roots, physical barriers, stuns, position changes, like pulling a mob to your location and many others). Healing will now be more along the lines of "group survival", and can be done by placing wards (straight damage prevention, instead of a heal), granting one time deflections or other damage misdirection's (like repels), giving damage dealers self healing items that they can click on when they feel they need to heal themselves, or cure themselves, along with the normal healings we are all familiar with and other actions. The damage dealers also don't have to be all bang and no utility, in fact, they wont be able to, since out of their 8 skills, at least 1 has to be a defensive, and 1 has to be support, load out changing depending on class. The dps classes will also want to focus on limiting npc movements through physical barrier creations. For example, during one of the panels, it was stated that a mage could burst a big whole under a group of NPCs, forcing these to attempt to climb out, all the meanwhile, the players used their ranged attacks to take them out.
No trinity does NOT equal no interdependencies, which is what it does in GW2. The lack of interdependency in that game has turned it into a Zerg-fest when it comes to doing any event. And stopping to rez a fallen comrade does not mean it is interdependent. Having your healer place a ward on your "tank" and then having him bait NPCs and lock them, so the designated dps keep them locked in place while everyone participates in taking them down... THAT is interdependent play, without the need of what was considered "trinity" in other games, like FFXIV, where tank holds agro, healer heals him, and dps does damage.
That's just a deflective comment, combat roles are going to be in the game, your just not force to play a certain way.
So we are just arguing to argue...you can take their word or not, that's your deal. Until I see otherwise, their system sounds great. Look at Landmark, I'm sure people thought devs were exaggerating there too. Any discussion is fairly meaningless until we are I game. Demos, screenshots, bullet points, dev talk are what they are. I have some faith myself. Those of you so against every piece of info that comes out and all the problems you see is amusing. I'm sure the devs are clueless and they mean the opposite of everything they say. EQN is a new attempt at an mmo, there will be bumps as they put it together. Most of the issues I see people have come from just not likely particular game mechanics. If you can't live without the trinity, EQN might not be fun. Complaining that it doesn't it pointless.
With that said, lets continue are pointless conversations.
Here is to hoping they can deliver on those promises.
"Its better to look ugly and win than pretty and lose"
I'm mostly concerned whether the combat is going to be another "Run in circles", "Catch me if you can", Bunny Hop mess. That's not saying standing idle throwing rotations is good either; but I loathe the so called "Benny Hill" direction the genre has adapted lately. I grow bored so quickly with it... ugh.
However, I'm mostly interested in how SOE plans on addressing "balance" in this game. Many, if not most, MMOs cater to the whiners that cry "nerf" towards a 1v1 type situation. MOBAs generally tend to balance towards Team Play (at least, that I have seen). Will SOE finally tell the whining "balance babies" to shut up and team up?
Too much "balance" creates a boring playing field. it's great for eSports and Ladder games. But in a game world where things are supposed to be "Alive"; too much balance would make the game a bit like GW2 no matter how smart the AI is. Running in circles is still running in circles.
I for one, am interested in seeing what they do with the overall mechanics of the combat towards that ever present nightmare called "balance".
Someone said it much better than me above, but...
They have said that you will need to build classes according to the encounter. You can't literally beat everything with any build. You just don't have to have a taunting tank or someone spamming heals. If the tank/cc were effective, you shouldn't need a lot of healing anyways. I remember in WoW having a bunch of healers and then slowly allowing shadow priests and variety the more we farmed a dungeon and the easier it became.
WoW did have some fun encounters but usually the trinity played a big role and most were dealing with the side adds or whatever. I made it to Naxx and stopped after BC came out so not sure how future raids went, most vids I see are tank and spank with a little variety.
I agree with SOE and think everyone should look out for themselves. Doesn't mean it had to be like GW2 and actually can't as you have a limited bar. Teamwork will be important from everything I've seen. Feel free to think they are idiots and are just copying GW2 and have no clue what they are doing...I believe the opposite.
Balancing should be fairly easy. Balance issues usually stem from classes having particular roles or focus. If anyone can be anything (within the class limits) there is no rock paper scissor or X class is better then Y class.
They have the anti-Mage build as an example, sure you can make an anti-rogue build as well. There will be counters to everything and how you build your templates will be a big deal. I think individual skill will play a bigger role the being a particular class with certain gear pieces.
Sandbox games with no trinity and adaptive combat roles have been done before, its not a new concept. The Trinity only came about because of end game raiding which was the means to keep max level players playing games that rely on the thempark model. GW 2 is not a sandbox game, real sandbox games are UO ,EVE and SWG and in those games you are given the choice on how you want to play.
Vutar, I am going to simplify this:
1) You said "I saw a post that said structure cannot happen without a trinity."
2) I said, "That post was about how EQNext does have a trinity (interdependence), but not the traditional type." Then I gave some information they talked about.
3) You said: "Exactly, nothing was shown, you are correct."
Number 3 there was definitely a deflective comment as it stated, "while you are correct, I am ignoring your points, and changing the subject to 'We haven't seen anything done, and have only their word to rely on'." I was discussing how they planned on making interdependency work without the traditional trinity, and you attempted to change it to "how they haven't shown it yet."
I will agree that they have done a lot of talking, and shown very little implementation, but that is the same thing that architects do. They put down everything they want, and tell people how they are going to build it. This does not mean they will not build it.
The "trinity" started in EQ, where there was a specific combination of classes that were OP when they worked together. The term was then coined to mean the use of a Tank, a Healer and Damage. All MMOs needed this concept, and in only changed to dungeons and end game because of WoW.
WoW turn the MMORPG genre from being a Group centric social game which imitated Dungeons and Dragons Paper and Pen play, to a solo game with some grouping SOMETIMES.
You are correct in stating that GW2 is not a sandbox, it is a PvP game with a Themepark MMORPG attached.
Actually, that's kinda what I meant by not balancing towards 1v1 (so thanks!). The anit-mage is completely "un-balanced" in how it can destroy a mage class character; but possibly have little to no defense towards another class. The game is as such, "balanced" towards Team play and not the 1v1. A more "modern" balance would be to make it so it would be a "fair" fight against the mage and so called anti-mage character... which, IMO, is boring over all. -- Wish I had thought to use that example. hehe
One issue I have though with "Individual skill" over Character skill is, they are marketing the game as an RPG. In a "good" RPG, Character skills/abilities/spells and the Characters' ability to not fizzle/fumble/miss/etc is more important than my own ability to run in circles or bunny hop on the screen. By lowering the "weight" of the Characters' Skills; they are watering down the RPG and making it an Action Title. This, IMO, is not innovating the genre; it's simply making an Action game fronting as something it's not.
That is, however, not a final judgement as I wait to see the end result and hope to be surprised.