As I have seen in mmo's that there are consecutively three ways to implement roles for classes.

A - One primary role which includes, tanks, healers, Dps and support. This is where each class has one role - This option focuses more heavily on grouping.

B - Duel Roles which include Tanks, Dps and Healers which is their primary role and their secondary role would be support base roles only.  - This role is a balance between grouping and soloing

C - Hybrid primary roles which means that there is the basic, tank, healer and Dps, but all classes can Dps. Pretty much WoW's style - This role focuses more on soloing

*Note* that support means, buffers/de-buffers/cc --- But not healers.

*Note* that dps includes, casters, melee and ranged

My question is simply which of the 3 aspects do you perfer roles should be implemented into a class based system, strickly fanasty based.

I am curious to see what taste this community has. I my self is a fan of B, because you will have fulfilled the trinity need. The support to me is a secondary role which is used as a perk to complement the primary role. I am also a fan of A as well.

I'd like to see more flexibility in class design.  The idea that this class can do this and maybe something else is so out dated and unrealistic.  For example why couldn't a rogue tank with enough dodge and parry? 

Give more classes more role options and let people figure out where they like to fit in or where then need to fit in.

Originally posted by Venger

I'd like to see more flexibility in class design.  The idea that this class can do this and maybe something else is so out dated and unrealistic.  For example why couldn't a rogue tank with enough dodge and parry? 

Give more classes more role options and let people figure out where they like to fit in or where then need to fit in.

Yeah I see your point. However, for some reason my stubborn mind stil see's this perspective as an offshoot of WoW's talent builds but more focused on roles. Which could work better than what they intially have. But when that happens, everyone want's to be a dps. There are two sides. 1. More classes for different types of tanking roles or 2. the "talent" based way all in conjecture into one class.

Personally I don't think class roles should be defined by the trinity.  I think encounters should be tweaked and outright rewritten to promote any style of group play without the need for tanking/healing/dps to be primary necessary roles.  Instead Classes should tailored to a class vision, in which their role is defined by the class itself, not it's spot in an encounter.

Promote individual player playstyles and make boss/encounter strategies more versatile so it doesn't feel like a scripted event that requires roles to be filled.

Terrible poll.

Being able to flexibly change your roll improves your ability to get a group together.  Yet the poll claims the opposite: that it makes for a worse grouping game.

Other factors determine how important grouping is in a game.  Not role flexibility.

Classless

 All MMOs should and need to be Classless.

/thread

Originally posted by UknownAspect

Personally I don't think class roles should be defined by the trinity.  I think encounters should be tweaked and outright rewritten to promote any style of group play without the need for tanking/healing/dps to be primary necessary roles.  Instead Classes should tailored to a class vision, in which their role is defined by the class itself, not it's spot in an encounter.

Promote individual player playstyles and make boss/encounter strategies more versatile so it doesn't feel like a scripted event that requires roles to be filled.

Why do people assume the worse? Bah, I guess being vague only gets you so far. You have described excactly how I have designed my classes/encounter mechanics sort of. I do understand that quite well and do agree.

Originally posted by Axehilt

Terrible poll.

Being able to flexibly change your roll improves your ability to get a group together.  Yet the poll claims the opposite: that it makes for a worse grouping game.

Other factors determine how important grouping is in a game.  Not role flexibility.

You didn't provide any explantion from here post here. I am going to assume the worse for you as well and assume that you enjoy the wow' mechanic for this. You have to balance it out where grouping and classes complement each other, not necassarly needed. I believe you completely misunderstood the entire thread.

Originally posted by Axehilt

Terrible poll.

Being able to flexibly change your roll improves your ability to get a group together.  Yet the poll claims the opposite: that it makes for a worse grouping game.

Other factors determine how important grouping is in a game.  Not role flexibility.

It improves your ability to get a group together, but degrades the grouping game once you do get a group together.

WoW is not a good grouping game pre-raid, but it's easy to get a group together.

DAoC is a great grouping game, but has less flexible roles.

I think you're confusing ease of getting a group together, which can be easy in any game, and whether or not it's worthwhile after you do so.

I played WoW and found it easy to find groups, but that grouping pre-raid pretty much sucked, and was more or less pointless except for a dungeon at the end of a quest line here and there.

It was sometimes harder to find groups in DAoC, but the grouping game was 10x better than WoW pre-raid.

Originally posted by Eronakis

Originally posted by Axehilt

Terrible poll.

Being able to flexibly change your roll improves your ability to get a group together.  Yet the poll claims the opposite: that it makes for a worse grouping game.

Other factors determine how important grouping is in a game.  Not role flexibility.

 You didn't provide any explantion from here post here. I am going to assume the worse for you as well and assume that you enjoy the wow' mechanic for this. You have to balance it out where grouping and classes complement each other, not necassarly needed. I believe you completely misunderstood the entire thread.

Is an explanation needed?

• No role flexibility: 8 people looking for group for Dungeon X.   7 DPS, 1 Healer.  No tank.  No group.
• Role flexibility: 8 people looking for group for Dungeon X.  7 DPS, 1 Healer.  Someone switches.  Grouping happens.

Mostly I was addressing your skewing of the poll responses by inferring lack of role flexibility made for a better grouping game, when it's just the opposite. So you tell people "vote here for the good group game!" when in fact they're voting for the bad group game.  It's a biased poll.

Ihmotepp: "It improves your ability to get a group together, but degrades the grouping game once you do get a group together."

Whaa---?   Nothing about WOW's flexible roles hurts its grouping.   What hurts its grouping is that soloing has vastly superior reward while leveling.   A factor unrelated to role flexibility.

How often can you switch jobs in FFXI?  I imagine often.  Does that role flexibility make FFXI a horrible grouping game?  Most comments I hear say it's one of the best grouping MMOs out there!

Originally posted by Axehilt

Originally posted by Eronakis

Originally posted by Axehilt

Terrible poll.

Being able to flexibly change your roll improves your ability to get a group together.  Yet the poll claims the opposite: that it makes for a worse grouping game.

Other factors determine how important grouping is in a game.  Not role flexibility.

 You didn't provide any explantion from here post here. I am going to assume the worse for you as well and assume that you enjoy the wow' mechanic for this. You have to balance it out where grouping and classes complement each other, not necassarly needed. I believe you completely misunderstood the entire thread.

Is an explanation needed?

• No role flexibility: 8 people looking for group for Dungeon X.   7 DPS, 1 Healer.  No tank.  No group.
• Role flexibility: 8 people looking for group for Dungeon X.  7 DPS, 1 Healer.  Someone switches.  Grouping happens.

Mostly I was addressing your skewing of the poll responses by inferring lack of role flexibility made for a better grouping game, when it's just the opposite. So you tell people "vote here for the good group game!" when in fact they're voting for the bad group game.  It's a biased poll.

Ihmotepp: "It improves your ability to get a group together, but degrades the grouping game once you do get a group together."

Whaa---?   Nothing about WOW's flexible roles hurts its grouping.   What hurts its grouping is that soloing has vastly superior reward while leveling.   A factor unrelated to role flexibility.

How often can you switch jobs in FFXI?  I imagine often.  Does that role flexibility make FFXI a horrible grouping game?  Most comments I hear say it's one of the best grouping MMOs out there!

I mean your classes will have the core trinity mechanics. Seriously, who's to say that you can't do a group with 1 healer and 5 dps? Did you notice in WoW, that many people were horrible at their class roles when they could switch at will? And most wanted to play one role versus' the other. Very a few could play both roles efficiently. I remember in PoV in EQ West Wall group. We camped that area with an all caster group. We kill stuff 5x faster than a normal group and it was loads of fun. Think outside the box big daddy. Get creative.

Oh and yes it's a biased poll because I am a group oriented player.. grouping first. Solo is only necassary if you can't find a group.

Originally posted by Ihmotepp

Originally posted by Axehilt

Terrible poll.

Being able to flexibly change your roll improves your ability to get a group together.  Yet the poll claims the opposite: that it makes for a worse grouping game.

Other factors determine how important grouping is in a game.  Not role flexibility.

 

It improves your ability to get a group together, but degrades the grouping game once you do get a group together.

WoW is not a good grouping game pre-raid, but it's easy to get a group together.

DAoC is a great grouping game, but has less flexible roles.

I think you're confusing ease of getting a group together, which can be easy in any game, and whether or not it's worthwhile after you do so.

I played WoW and found it easy to find groups, but that grouping pre-raid pretty much sucked, and was more or less pointless except for a dungeon at the end of a quest line here and there.

It was sometimes harder to find groups in DAoC, but the grouping game was 10x better than WoW pre-raid.

I agree, curious did you choose A or B?

Holy trinity must die! There are no tanks in PvP -> tanks should not be -> no aggro/taunt mechanics -> better AI -> combat becomes *gasp* more challenging -> fun. I picked C.

Originally posted by Quirhid

Holy trinity must die! There are no tanks in PvP -> tanks should not be -> no aggro/taunt mechanics -> better AI -> combat becomes *gasp* more challenging -> fun. I picked C.

The trinity will never die, because when someone creates a new alternate, it will get scutinzed and no one will like it. The way I am desighing my mmo, it has the trinity and allows AI to be realistic. I thought you was better than that, sorry you picked C. I think C is by far the worst.

Originally posted by Eronakis

Originally posted by Quirhid

Holy trinity must die! There are no tanks in PvP -> tanks should not be -> no aggro/taunt mechanics -> better AI -> combat becomes *gasp* more challenging -> fun. I picked C.

 

The trinity will never die, because when someone creates a new alternate, it will get scutinzed and no one will like it. The way I am desighing my mmo, it has the trinity and allows AI to be realistic. I thought you was better than that, sorry you picked C. I think C is by far the worst.

Case and point: Guild Wars. It certainly wasn't hated because of its combat. Regardless of the vocal haters, it was/is a huge success. No taunt/aggro mechanics here. People need to play "non-trinity" games more often.

Originally posted by Eronakis

Originally posted by Axehilt

Originally posted by Eronakis

Originally posted by Axehilt

Terrible poll.

Being able to flexibly change your roll improves your ability to get a group together.  Yet the poll claims the opposite: that it makes for a worse grouping game.

Other factors determine how important grouping is in a game.  Not role flexibility.

 You didn't provide any explantion from here post here. I am going to assume the worse for you as well and assume that you enjoy the wow' mechanic for this. You have to balance it out where grouping and classes complement each other, not necassarly needed. I believe you completely misunderstood the entire thread.

Is an explanation needed?

• No role flexibility: 8 people looking for group for Dungeon X.   7 DPS, 1 Healer.  No tank.  No group.
• Role flexibility: 8 people looking for group for Dungeon X.  7 DPS, 1 Healer.  Someone switches.  Grouping happens.

Mostly I was addressing your skewing of the poll responses by inferring lack of role flexibility made for a better grouping game, when it's just the opposite. So you tell people "vote here for the good group game!" when in fact they're voting for the bad group game.  It's a biased poll.

Ihmotepp: "It improves your ability to get a group together, but degrades the grouping game once you do get a group together."

Whaa---?   Nothing about WOW's flexible roles hurts its grouping.   What hurts its grouping is that soloing has vastly superior reward while leveling.   A factor unrelated to role flexibility.

How often can you switch jobs in FFXI?  I imagine often.  Does that role flexibility make FFXI a horrible grouping game?  Most comments I hear say it's one of the best grouping MMOs out there!

 I mean your classes will have the core trinity mechanics. Seriously, who's to say that you can't do a group with 1 healer and 5 dps? Did you notice in WoW, that many people were horrible at their class roles when they could switch at will? And most wanted to play one role versus' the other. Very a few could play both roles efficiently. I remember in PoV in EQ West Wall group. We camped that area with an all caster group. We kill stuff 5x faster than a normal group and it was loads of fun. Think outside the box big daddy. Get creative.

Oh and yes it's a biased poll because I am a group oriented player.. grouping first. Solo is only necassary if you can't find a group.

You don't really seem to be addressing my point.  

You inferred role flexibility made for a solo game, just because there's one big example of a game with role flexibility being a solo game (WOW.)

I explained yes, but this is a result of other factors.  Not role flexibility.

Further, I explained how role flexibility actually improves a game's grouping potential.

• Trinity mechanic?  Doesn't matter.  Whatever the roles are, it's going to be advantageous for players to spread out in some fashion between those roles (even if the optimal group for one section happens to be 5 casters.)  Therefore flexibility has improved the situation.
• Players either not willing or not able to perform different roles?  Flexibility provides the option to fix group composition through willingness and ability. Even if this is a very small portion of the playerbase, it's a net-positive change.

So really I'm trying to get you to see that (a) it's wrong to paint the role flexibility option as the "solo option" because it's not, and (b) as a grouper you should be interested in seeing more role-flexible games made because it better facilitates grouping.

As someone who has not played that many online game, I find that the ability to utilize my dual class makes it easier to put together a group than if everyone is playing the same class.  I've found that playing games like GW makes this very simple for me, and allows me to change to the parties needs without needing to have 3 spare char. to log in with.

This doesn't mean that I don't like to create char. to use at different times with different roles, or that I am not afraid to mix it up from time to time.   I also find that I very rarely join a group that is only looking for one type of char. role as opposed to deversity with the group that they want to work with.  I also like the knowledge that while i'm fighting enemy's on the field that I don't have to wast time with healing myself, or if I can get the kill before the other Tank in the group that is 10 levels higher than I am.

I do lean more twards games that allow duel role but don't delegate the second class role to support only, but allow them to be used on equal terms by only having to make minor changes to equipment, or skills. IMO