Originally posted by gobla

Originally posted by AKASlaphappy

I'm talking about 3 systems:

1. Holy trinity with heal-bot and taunt-tank.
2. System without trinity.
3. trinity system with improved healer and tank mechanics.

I'm saying that System 1 < System 2 < System 3.

 

So abandoning the trinity is better then keeping a broken heal-bot and taunt-tank system. It's however not better, in my opinion, then replacing the heal-bot and taunt-tank with actual interesting mechanics.

 

Dismissing a broken system is good. Fixing a broken system is better. Problem is we haven't figured out yet how to fix the system. So GW2 is, in my opinion, taking the easier route of just dismissing it.

 

Also the problem I'm seeing with your whole explanation is that basically it seems it won't fix anything. Why?

 

There wasn't a shortage of Monks because people hated Monks. There was a shortage of Monks because people hated playing support.

 

Allowing every class to play support will just lead to players either refusing to fill their support role or being forced into it and playing it horribly. And since the choice is no longer based on wether or not a player wants to play support ( because apperantly playing support, like a healer, is boring. ) it will instead be determined by which class is slightly better at that support role. And that class will then again be funneled into the support role as so many hybrids are. And because they're hybrids they won't even be able to provide the interesting and unique skill combinations that a pure support class would because by their very design only a small amount of their skills are aimed at support.

 

You say that I can get 8 support skills just like a Monk on the Guardian, but how many support skills total will the Guardian have? The Monk had over a hundred. Meaning you had hundreds of viable ways of filling those slots. Even for the most obsessive min/maxer you still had over 10 builds that were all viable. Will the guardian or any other class in GW2 have so many ways of filling a single role? I doubt it. I hope they do, but I doubt it.

 

More likely there will 2/3 viable weapon choices for a role and 2/3 viable utility skill choices. Combining for under 10 viable builds. An obsessive min/maxer could probably scrap over half of those meaning we're left with 3/4 choices. Granted, being able to combo your skills with others will allow for some extra flexibility but the whole reason why support and tank classes had to go was that players want to be viable on their own, without relying on others.

 

Allowing every class to support isn't the solution. Making supporting an interesting and fun activity is. Which is why a system where every class can fill an unique but always fun and interesting role is better then a system in which every class can fulfill every role, some of them fun and some of them not. But we haven't figured out how to make such a system yet. So for now GW2s system is better then we have. It's an improvement, I agree with that. But I disagree that it's some sort of ultimate system that all games should adopt.

These are the 2 problems with the holy trinity:

1) LF Tank/Healer

2) Dull Tank and Spank combat

Changing the way tanking and healing works may fix problem 2, but it still leaves problem 1.

Anet wants to get rid of both problems. The only way to get rid of "LF Tank/Healer" is to get rid of tanks and healers and putting everybody on equal footing and allowing them to contribute to the group in their own way.

Simply changing the way tanks and healers works will still make it so that tanks and healers are the only 2 necessary people and everybody else is just there to make the fights go faster.

The reason I think you don't like Anet getting rid of healers and tanks is because you were a healer (you already said this) and you were the most necessary person in the group. You even said earlier in the thread that you were the "backbone" of the group. The problem with that is that everybody else wasn't as important.

Until you can find a way to make everybody else as important as the healers and tanks then I don't think we are ever going to find a better solution than just getting rid of them.

To the orange part: This comment shows that you are still stuck in the holy trinity mindset and not thinking in the way that Anet wants you to.

People aren't going to spec for support and do an entire dungeon that way. Anet is allowing you to switch between weapon sets in the middle of combat so that people can switch between 2 or more entirely different playstyles. They want you to react to how the battle is going and changing up your style rather than just utilizing a single role. Anet wants people to support when support is needed, CC when CC is needed and damage when damage is needed. They don't want people to be only doing damage, or only doing CC, or only doing support and pigeon-holing themselves into certain roles (like you are wanting them to).

Originally posted by romanator0

 

These are the 2 problems with the holy trinity:

1) LF Tank/Healer

2) Dull Tank and Spank combat

Changing the way tanking and healing works may fix problem 2, but it still leaves problem 1.

Anet wants to get rid of both problems. The only way to get rid of "LF Tank/Healer" is to get rid of tanks and healers and putting everybody on equal footing and allowing them to contribute to the group in their own way.

Simply changing the way tanks and healers works will still make it so that tanks and healers are the only 2 necessary people and everybody else is just there to make the fights go faster.

The reason I think you don't like Anet getting rid of healers and tanks is because you were a healer (you already said this) and you were the most necessary person in the group. You even said earlier in the thread that you were the "backbone" of the group. The problem with that is that everybody else wasn't as important.

Until you can find a way to make everybody else as important as the healers and tanks then I don't think we are ever going to find a better solution than just getting rid of them.

 Thats as clear as it gets !

Originally posted by romanator0

These are the 2 problems with the holy trinity:

1) LF Tank/Healer

2) Dull Tank and Spank combat

Changing the way tanking and healing works may fix problem 2, but it still leaves problem 1.

Anet wants to get rid of both problems. The only way to get rid of "LF Tank/Healer" is to get rid of tanks and healers and putting everybody on equal footing and allowing them to contribute to the group in their own way.

Simply changing the way tanks and healers works will still make it so that tanks and healers are the only 2 necessary people and everybody else is just there to make the fights go faster.

The reason I think you don't like Anet getting rid of healers and tanks is because you were a healer (you already said this) and you were the most necessary person in the group. You even said earlier in the thread that you were the "backbone" of the group. The problem with that is that everybody else wasn't as important.

Until you can find a way to make everybody else as important as the healers and tanks then I don't think we are ever going to find a better solution than just getting rid of them.

If problem 2 is fixed and tanks/healers are no longer boring then players will more often play tanks/healers as they are now a fun and interesting playstyle. Thus solving problem 1.

You're right though. I like being an important, meaningfull, contributing and needed member of my group. I don't need to more important then anyone else. But I do want to feel like I'm doing something that nobody else in the group could do. Like I'm an unique part of the group.

So the problem is how to make everyone important? How to create a trinity ( or quartet etc. ) where every role is equally important. Where everyone has certain skills that benefit everyone else in the party.

The more I think about it the more I think that Healers and Tanks aren't the problem. It's the DPS that needs to go. Or more accurately needs to be replaced. Create a trinity of Tank/Controller/Healer ( and no, DCUO does not have this... ).

Link damage instead to the classes their mechanics. Make it a reward for fulfilling your role. A tank that gets hit slowly raises his damage the more blows he receives. A controller's debuffs do additional damage the more debuffed enemies there are. A healer's heals start damaging enemies around his targets the more damage he prevents or heals.

This creates a system of challenge. A tank's damage increases when gets hit more. So you need to get more mobs to hit your tank. So you pull more. Tank starts taking a lot more damage, so the healer needs to heal it up. In turn the healer's damage increases and starts damaging the enemies around the tank. Tank's health is doing good and tank and healer are doing tons of damage. But we want more. So we pull more mobs. Tank gets hit more so does even more damage. The healer's protection spells protect even more so the healer does more damage. But the healer's heals can't keep up. We don't want to fight fewer enemies so we need to instead weaken them. Luckily the controller saves the day. He debuffs all the mobs, and crowd controls a few. Since we're already pulling a whole load of mobs the controller's damage skyrockets just like that of the Tank and Healer. The mobs now deal less damage and everyone is surviving again.

As long as everyone keeps doing their job we'll continue killing stuff at a rapid level. If anyone drops the ball we all die and next time we'll have to pull fewer mobs and kill stuff at a slower pace. If the tank loses control of the mobs we die. If the healer messes up his protection spells we die. If the controller uses the wrong debuffs we die. Everyone has a clear and interesting role and everyone is important.

To the orange part: This comment shows that you are still stuck in the holy trinity mindset and not thinking in the way that Anet wants you to.

People aren't going to spec for support and do an entire dungeon that way. Anet is allowing you to switch between weapon sets in the middle of combat so that people can switch between 2 or more entirely different playstyles. They want you to react to how the battle is going and changing up your style rather than just utilizing a single role. Anet wants people to support when support is needed, CC when CC is needed and damage when damage is needed. They don't want people to be only doing damage, or only doing CC, or only doing support and pigeon-holing themselves into certain roles (like you are wanting them to).

There's a reason why people specialise in everything they do. Specialisation means you can focus all your attention on knowledge on a single thing.

Even if that's the design there will still be people assigned to support. Else you'll just run into situations where, when support is needed, player 1 thinks player 2 will do it. Player 2 thinks player 3 will do it and player 3 thinks player 1 will do it. In the end nobody does it. Or maybe everyone does it. Either you wipe or you waste a lot of mana. So somebody will be on support duty so that everyone can be certain that when support is needed he does it. Instead of either nobody or everybody.

In addition to that using your skills the right way will take knowledge and understanding. It's generally better to have 3 people each understanding a single style completely then having 3 people each understanding all styles a little bit.

Originally posted by gobla

Originally posted by romanator0

These are the 2 problems with the holy trinity:

1) LF Tank/Healer

2) Dull Tank and Spank combat

Changing the way tanking and healing works may fix problem 2, but it still leaves problem 1.

Anet wants to get rid of both problems. The only way to get rid of "LF Tank/Healer" is to get rid of tanks and healers and putting everybody on equal footing and allowing them to contribute to the group in their own way.

Simply changing the way tanks and healers works will still make it so that tanks and healers are the only 2 necessary people and everybody else is just there to make the fights go faster.

The reason I think you don't like Anet getting rid of healers and tanks is because you were a healer (you already said this) and you were the most necessary person in the group. You even said earlier in the thread that you were the "backbone" of the group. The problem with that is that everybody else wasn't as important.

Until you can find a way to make everybody else as important as the healers and tanks then I don't think we are ever going to find a better solution than just getting rid of them.

If problem 2 is fixed and tanks/healers are no longer boring then players will more often play tanks/healers as they are now a fun and interesting playstyle. Thus solving problem 1.

You're right though. I like being an important, meaningfull, contributing and needed member of my group. I don't need to more important then anyone else. But I do want to feel like I'm doing something that nobody else in the group could do. Like I'm an unique part of the group.

So the problem is how to make everyone important? How to create a trinity ( or quartet etc. ) where every role is equally important. Where everyone has certain skills that benefit everyone else in the party.

The more I think about it the more I think that Healers and Tanks aren't the problem. It's the DPS that needs to go. Or more accurately needs to be replaced. Create a trinity of Tank/Controller/Healer ( and no, DCUO does not have this... ).

Link damage instead to the classes their mechanics. Make it a reward for fulfilling your role. A tank that gets hit slowly raises his damage the more blows he receives. A controller's debuffs do additional damage the more debuffed enemies there are. A healer's heals start damaging enemies around his targets the more damage he prevents or heals.

This creates a system of challenge. A tank's damage increases when gets hit more. So you need to get more mobs to hit your tank. So you pull more. Tank starts taking a lot more damage, so the healer needs to heal it up. In turn the healer's damage increases and starts damaging the enemies around the tank. Tank's health is doing good and tank and healer are doing tons of damage. But we want more. So we pull more mobs. Tank gets hit more so does even more damage. The healer's protection spells protect even more so the healer does more damage. But the healer's heals can't keep up. We don't want to fight fewer enemies so we need to instead weaken them. Luckily the controller saves the day. He debuffs all the mobs, and crowd controls a few. Since we're already pulling a whole load of mobs the controller's damage skyrockets just like that of the Tank and Healer. The mobs now deal less damage and everyone is surviving again.

As long as everyone keeps doing their job we'll continue killing stuff at a rapid level. If anyone drops the ball we all die and next time we'll have to pull fewer mobs and kill stuff at a slower pace. If the tank loses control of the mobs we die. If the healer messes up his protection spells we die. If the controller uses the wrong debuffs we die. Everyone has a clear and interesting role and everyone is important.

No. You are still stuck in the trinity mindset. Now instead of "LF tank/healer" it is now "LF tank/healer/CC".

GW2 is going for "LFG" or "LF member". You are still pigeon-holing people into certain roles. GW2 is trying to make it so that people AREN'T pigeon-holed into certain roles.

Getting replacing dps with crowd-controllers would actually make the first problem worse as you would have to search for that third person rather than just the tank and healer.

Originally posted by romanator0

No. You are still stuck in the trinity mindset. Now instead of "LF tank/healer" it is now "LF tank/healer/CC".

GW2 is going for "LFG" or "LF member". You are still pigeon-holing people into certain roles. GW2 is trying to make it so that people AREN'T pigeon-holed into certain roles.

Getting replacing dps with crowd-controllers would actually make the first problem worse as you would have to search for that third person rather than just the tank and healer.

Seeing as tank/healer/CC are all the possible roles it's logically equivalent to member.

But let's just agree to disagree. We don't seem to be going anywhere at all.

I believe that no matter the game mechanics people will focus on a single role. Even if only to be absolutely certain that role gets done. Sharing roles only works if there's a person who holds the end responsibility. So that person would still be pigeon-holed into that role no matter what. And since we're being pigeon-holed anyway we might as well make all the roles we can get pigeon-holed into fun, important and challenging roles.

You believe that I'm wrong and that sharing roles can be done without somebody holding the end responsiblity. I'd like you to be right. I hope you are. But I can't make myself believe it.

Originally posted by Unlight

I understand the concerns of people who prefer to play dedicated healing roles since I always enjoyed that myself.  The first character I had that finished Prophesies back in the day, was my Monk.  But I also have to admit that it was cool to be the center of attenion.  Your presence is mandatory.  Your safety takes precedence over everything else -- all other priorities rescinded (right Ash?).  But that also breeds a bit of arrogance, which frankly, is where I see most of the criticism coming from.  Healers will not be special and precious in this game.  No one will be more important than another.  And I think this is why many have a hard time accepting it.  This goes for dedicated tanks too.  There's no longer a spotlight for them to stand in while they keep a boss's focus.  They're going to have to work for a living like the rest of us ground pounders.  It's no wonder there's push back for GW2's class system.

QFT. Sums up my thoughts pretty well.

Originally posted by gobla

...

So the problem is how to make everyone important? How to create a trinity ( or quartet etc. ) where every role is equally important. Where everyone has certain skills that benefit everyone else in the party.

The more I think about it the more I think that Healers and Tanks aren't the problem. It's the DPS that needs to go. Or more accurately needs to be replaced. Create a trinity of Tank/Controller/Healer ( and no, DCUO does not have this... ).

Link damage instead to the classes their mechanics. Make it a reward for fulfilling your role. A tank that gets hit slowly raises his damage the more blows he receives. A controller's debuffs do additional damage the more debuffed enemies there are. A healer's heals start damaging enemies around his targets the more damage he prevents or heals.

This creates a system of challenge. A tank's damage increases when gets hit more. So you need to get more mobs to hit your tank. So you pull more. Tank starts taking a lot more damage, so the healer needs to heal it up. In turn the healer's damage increases and starts damaging the enemies around the tank. Tank's health is doing good and tank and healer are doing tons of damage. But we want more. So we pull more mobs. Tank gets hit more so does even more damage. The healer's protection spells protect even more so the healer does more damage. But the healer's heals can't keep up. We don't want to fight fewer enemies so we need to instead weaken them. Luckily the controller saves the day. He debuffs all the mobs, and crowd controls a few. Since we're already pulling a whole load of mobs the controller's damage skyrockets just like that of the Tank and Healer. The mobs now deal less damage and everyone is surviving again.

As long as everyone keeps doing their job we'll continue killing stuff at a rapid level. If anyone drops the ball we all die and next time we'll have to pull fewer mobs and kill stuff at a slower pace. If the tank loses control of the mobs we die. If the healer messes up his protection spells we die. If the controller uses the wrong debuffs we die. Everyone has a clear and interesting role and everyone is important.

Well isn't that exactly what Rift is doing with the hybrid class' created in its soul system? I haven't played it myself, so I can't know for sure, but I know that you can spec a Mage DPS (Chloromancer) that heals as you do damage, a Warrior Tank (Void-knight) that ramps up its damage as it recieves a certain kind of damage and a Rogue CC (Saboteur) that can easily nuke a target after stacking a bunch of debuffs. But the problem with Rift's soul system is that, even with all these options, if you stray too far from the holy trinity you'll gimp your class.

So in the sort of system you are proposing you'll just get people complaining that you're "doing it wrong". Since when you've got a game with the holy trinity, but allow people to stray from the trinity; you'll have a lot of people making characters that can do multiple things but just useless overall.

Just to re-iterate a previous point... this Guardian looks very support friendly and that's even before speccing it to support. Just look at the skill descriptions & traits shown.

I don't mind a new approach as long as it is still tough in dungeons to succeed. I would hope you could still fail or even more so now if everyone is not playing smart by crowd control and using abilities to reduce damage. It has to be better than WoWs garbage face plowing through dungeons now.

Originally posted by qombi

I don't mind a new approach as long as it is still tough in dungeons to succeed. I would hope you could still fail or even more so now if everyone is not playing smart by crowd control and using abilities to reduce damage. It has to be better than WoWs garbage face plowing through dungeons now.

It was said a long time ago that dungeons were going to be designed so that they were the most difficult content in the game. At PAX East Jeff Grubb said that the skill and learning curve for each dungeon would go up for each explorable mode you do.

Originally posted by Master10K

Well isn't that exactly what Rift is doing with the hybrid class' created in its soul system? I haven't played it myself, so I can't know for sure, but I know that you can spec a Mage DPS (Chloromancer) that heals as you do damage, a Warrior Tank (Void-knight) that ramps up its damage as it recieves a certain kind of damage and a Rogue CC (Saboteur) that can easily nuke a target after stacking a bunch of debuffs. But the problem with Rift's soul system is that, even with all these options, if you stray too far from the holy trinity you'll gimp your class.

So in the sort of system you are proposing you'll just get people complaining that you're "doing it wrong". Since when you've got a game with the holy trinity, but allow people to stray from the trinity; you'll have a lot of people making characters that can do multiple things but just useless overall.

The whole idea is to create a system in which you can't stray from the trinity. No matter what class or spec you're always performing a fun, interesting and needed role in the party. As the tank class you can pick multiple ways to tank but you're always a tank. There's no way to DPS as a tank except by doing your job. As a healer you're always a healer. You can spec to change your style ( HoTs vs Direct etc. ) but you always heal. Only way to damage is through your mechanic.

In the end no matter what you spec you're always able to perform the role you need to. The only way to do it wrong is by failing your role. You can take all the fun and interesting specs and then adept them to perform the role you want them to. Pets are cool? Create a pet system in which pets can debuff enemies around them and assist in the controller role. Wards and such are cool? Create a warding system which traps enemies inside the ward with only you, the tank. Thus forcing them to attack you since they can't reach your allies. Teleportation is cool? Create a healer that can only heal in melee range but has several teleportations to instantly jump from ally to ally.

You get a system allowing for a large amount of playstyles that are all usefull, fun and interesting. Balance won't be perfect, but that's a given in all games. But with so many ways to heal, tank or CC you're bound to always find someone who enjoyes one of these ways.

The problem is that in a lot of MMOs the needed roles are the boring ones while the fun roles aren't really needed in groups. I say make all roles fun and needed while still retaining their unique aspects.

I really feel sorry for arenanet. There are so many people who just don't understand what they're doing

Originally posted by Milkopilko

I really feel sorry for arenanet. There are so many people who just don't understand what they're doing

Don't. If the game is fun enough people will buy it no matter how critical they are before launch.

It do sounds good to me so far but we can't really say that. ANET will sell as many copies of the game as they deserve so if it is good enough even many of the people who complains most will eventually buy it.

If not then it wont do so well. So it sorts itself out. :)

Originally posted by Milkopilko

I really feel sorry for arenanet. There are so many people who just don't understand what they're doing

People will come around soon. There are some people who have not been keeping up with the game very well. But lots of things GW2 has going are rather quite new.

Originally posted by Milkopilko

I really feel sorry for arenanet. There are so many people who just don't understand what they're doing

I don't really feel sorry for ANet, but I am not envious of the daunting task ahead of them as well. They are breaking years of convention, and it's to be expected that many folks can't wrap their heads around it. Just the fact that they had to add in scouts to act as pesudo quest givers should be a testament of how different GW2 is going to be from any other mmo out there.

People fear what they don't understand, it's human nature. My only fear is that the combat system is going to be so different (and awesome) that GW2 is going to completely ruin all traditional mmos for me.

I love the fact that they destroyed the Holy Trinity, it really creates diversity and allows anyone to play with anyone and I really think some people have a hard time understanding this.

Also @Gobla, no offence but I think you are being really narrow minded on the subject, regardless the facts even though they fit into your version of greatness that was experienced in GW you continue to argue the Trinity would be better. Changing the basic idea of LF tank LF healer, and adding CC just adds another problem rather than solving it. I really think you a being stubborn with your point of view rather than trying to see things in a different light.

Some people just have a hard time adjusting to change. If you can't then that's ok, there are plenty of other games out there that cater to your playstyle.

Narrow-minded means a lack of tolerance. Not a lack of agreement.

Thereby you're saying I don't tolerate GW2. As I've mentioned countless times I'm not trying to change GW2. I accept GW2 for what it is. I'm fine with GW2.

I'm not saying GW2 will fail. I'm not saying GW2 sucks. I'm not saying anything about GW2 at all.

I'm saying that I, in my very personal very subjective opinion, think that a trinity done right is more fun then disregarding the trinity.

I'm only talking about myself. I'm not talking about you. I'm not talking about the game you're worshipping.

And when it comes to me I am stubborn. I'm not going to change my own opinion because you're telling me to. I'm not going to change my opinion because you tell me I'm wrong. I'm only going to change my opinion when I see enough facts supporting the change. And seeing as the game isn't released yet those facts simply aren't here.

Why am I suddenly a stubborn narrow-minded person because I personally think the trinity does have some positive sides?

Why am I suddenly trying to change the game when I provide examples of a system I think I would enjoy as was asked of me?

I was unaware that disagreeing with people was narrow-minded. I always thought that being open-minded was all about discussing things with people especially if you disagree with them. And if you disagree with each other you refrain from calling each other stubbon and narrow-minded. And if, after discussing things, you still disagree with each other you have the decency of accepting that not all people believe as you do.

I'm not telling you to change your opinion. I'm not telling you to change this game. But I'm sure as hell telling you my opinion on a public forum if I so choose.

Originally posted by gobla

Narrow-minded means a lack of tolerance. Not a lack of agreement.

Thereby you're saying I don't tolerate GW2. As I've mentioned countless times I'm not trying to change GW2. I accept GW2 for what it is. I'm fine with GW2.

I'm not saying GW2 will fail. I'm not saying GW2 sucks. I'm not saying anything about GW2 at all.

I'm saying that I, in my very personal very subjective opinion, think that a trinity done right is more fun then disregarding the trinity.

I'm only talking about myself. I'm not talking about you. I'm not talking about the game you're worshipping.

And when it comes to me I am stubborn. I'm not going to change my own opinion because you're telling me to. I'm not going to change my opinion because you tell me I'm wrong. I'm only going to change my opinion when I see enough facts supporting the change. And seeing as the game isn't released yet those facts simply aren't here.

Why am I suddenly a stubborn narrow-minded person because I personally think the trinity does have some positive sides?

Why am I suddenly trying to change the game when I provide examples of a system I think I would enjoy as was asked of me?

I was unaware that disagreeing with people was narrow-minded. I always thought that being open-minded was all about discussing things with people especially if you disagree with them. And if you disagree with each other you refrain from calling each other stubbon and narrow-minded. And if, after discussing things, you still disagree with each other you have the decency of accepting that not all people believe as you do.

I'm not telling you to change your opinion. I'm not telling you to change this game. But I'm sure as hell telling you my opinion on a public forum if I so choose.

Originally posted by KhinRunite
A question for you, my friend: Have you ever been rejected from groups because they're reserving slots for a specific class? Wouldn't it be better if you can join groups a bit more easily, without having to form personal bonds or using politics?

As I've said before there are 2 sides to this story.

This is one of them. It sucks to wait on healer and tanks. It sucks to be rejected from group because you're not the right class.

It's a valid complaint on a very negative side of the trinity. I'm not arguing against that.

I am arguing that by making every class able to fill every role you're losing something as well.

A class like the Monk that has over a hundred supportive skills that can be combined in dozens of viable and interesting support builds will be lost. Classes that can fill multiple roles won't have the amount of tools available to them for a single role as a class that focusses on a single role. The devs only have time to create X skills. If they give all supportive skills to a single class then that class will have more supportive skills then another class who received only a portion of said supportive skills ( but did receive other skills in addition. )

In addition to that there's also a certain joy in building working groups from specialised classes. Taking only 1 healer with you means you risk wiping because there's nobody else there that can fill that role. But the reward is that you're now able to take more from other specialisations to compensate. Taking 2 tanks means you have much less risk of squishies getting agro as the second tank will have his skills ready to intercept that mob, but you lose the utility another specialised class would bring. If all classes can fill all roles and dynamically switch between them then this is lost. There's no longer a tactical aspect to group building. You can just take whatever and it'll always work.

Wether or not the negatives outweigh the positives is up to each person individually. I'm not trying to make that decision for you. I'm just sharing my opinion that the trinity does have positive sides, and I think it's a loss if you don't at least recognise those. Even if, or especially if, you don't believe they outweigh the positive sides.