| 179 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
4/11/12 5:50:14 PM#161
Originally posted by ButeoRegalis No, basically at the start of Cataclysm they nerfed healers. Everyone already had crowd control skills, its just you didnt have to use them until healers got nerfed (heals were made less potent and mana consumption became an issue). So Cataclysm was a bit of a culture shock for players. |
|
|
4/11/12 6:02:34 PM#162
I don't think many post-WoW players will understand that the trinity system was basically a shortcut for developers to handle combat. It's easier to program & balance around a hate table, than to have a truly dynamic content in which players are getting targetted based on what they are doing, rather than what class they are / whether or not they taunted. There were also a lot more technical limitations around the time of everquest than they are now. So nowadays there is really no good reason for developers to still be basing games around that system, other than the fact that people have gotten used to it. Hell, look at single-player RPGs. Many of them didn't have a trinity, but now more & more of them are building the system in. It's something we've grown to accept, and thus assume it's a necessity. |
|
|
GeezerGamer
 Advanced Member
Joined: 4/03/12
Who ever said "Familiarity breeds contempt" didn't have an internet connection. |
4/11/12 6:42:58 PM#163
Originally posted by Vorthanion And just to set the facts straight, Good, bad or indifferent, Anarchy Online was as trinity as it gets If the conversation turned "Tit-for-Tat", and I've stopped posting, Consider it your win. |
|
4/12/12 1:01:21 AM#164
Yeah same here. The game looks awesome, and I look forward to the challenge, but that will be a challenge likely seen only be people in guilds. If the game is awesome as it appears to be, you will get a ton of people from WoW. And a ton of those people will suck. I think some people underestimate the stubborness of sucky players to continue to suck. Like I said I may be cynical but I have a feeling with that much individual responsibility I will not want to be in a group with people unless I know they can pull their weight, and I don't think I will be the only one. And this will really go against the otherwise drop in and play nature of the rest of the game.
|
|
|
4/12/12 4:59:54 AM#165
I love every single bit of the GW2 concept so far. It is close in the spirit to the basic idea of classes in early RPGs as the different skill sets essentially complementing to the party's success, but not limited to a certain role. Actually the holly trinity was initially Fighter-Mage-Thief (no priest and healing classes)... All 3 had both close combat and ranged combat potential (no ranged/close combat classes)! It was rather the difference in approach to solving the problems, rather than ability to solve certain problems and inability to solve the others - for example a fighter would bash the door to open it, a thief would pick a lock, while mage would either destroy it with fireball or ... say.... teleport on the other side... BTW - I hate you people who cite the posts longer than my screen! I hope the forum administration bans your asses permanently. |
|
|
4/12/12 5:09:42 AM#166
Originally posted by GrumpyMel2 D&D was completely based on the trinity when it came to combat. Sure characters could do other things and had other odd specialties, but at it's core, it was based on the trinity. The whole idea of a rogue, fighter, wizard, and cleric party came from D&D. And to say rogues weren't DPS guys, did you ever really play the game? Backstab? |
|
|
Faelan
 Apprentice Member
Joined: 11/13/04
Oops - looks like I'm an internet dog who somehow learned how to type. What has the world come to? |
4/12/12 6:39:07 AM#167
I respectfully disagree. Dunno about you, but I did a lot of 2nd ed D&D (which came out long before EQ et al.) with various groups both as player and DM. Thief did have backstab, obviously, but it was never a source of significant overall DPS. It was often used as an opening attack only. When that wasn't the case, it usually required a couple of rounds of maneuvering and several skill rolls, which had a high probability of failure unless the thief was high level or the battlefield had lots of places to hide (forest at night was just about the perfect place for a low level thief). Overall, that significantly reduced his DPS contribution and it was very situational. Magic-user DPS was also very situational. We had plenty of fights where he would contribute almost nothing DPS wise, only to have his DPS spike through the roof when he tossed a fireball into a company of orcs. Because he had limited spell use, especially at low levels, he would always try to save them for the big fight. He was extremely useful out of combat though, sometimes using spells to completely bypass fights that would have resulted in a total party kill. As for clerics, they did heal, but usually not in-combat unless it was a tough fight where healing was needed right now. There was always a fear that some foe would try to interrupt his healing spell. Why? Because he was usually up front bashing in skulls, thus being vulnerable to interruption. Being able to wear heavy armor while having good HP and THACO meant that he was well suited for combat. He could tank when needed, heal at the same time and did OK DPS. Against undeads he was outright crazy. The best overall DPSer though, was the fighter. He could attack all day long and could do so more often than any of the other classes with big damage bonuses on top of that and access to pretty much all weapons. Sure, there were fights where the thief, magic-user or cleric (turn/destroy undead) would shine, but when those situations were not present, it was always the fighter who did the big damage. Because of his high HP and low AC, he was generally also the best tank. So basically, in 2nd ed D&D the classes were nothing like their MMO counterparts in terms of playstyle. You could argue that there was a type of quadrinity between the four archetypes, but it was nothing like The Holy Trinity that we see in MMOs today and unlike MMOs, you could break it without breaking the game in the process. It just meant the DM would have to make encounters that took in mind that this particular party had 2 thieves and 2 magic-users with no cleric and fighter backup. Now, if you're talking 4th ed D&D, then it's a completely different picture, but that came out long after the holy trinity had been established. I'm a big ol' fluffy carewolf. Be afraid. Be very afraid. |
|
4/12/12 7:00:55 AM#168
I find the whole idea that AN has eliminated the holy trinity amusing. How have they done so? 1. Giving every class nearly instant combat rez 2. Giving every class self heal 3. Dumb down the bosses Hey, you can do the same thing in any other mmo and eliminate the trinity as well. Personally I don't care much. i won't be doing any boss fights. I play a healer in other mmos and there is no healer class in GW2. I will enjoy the "action oriented combat" (re: console game type fighting) for a while (already ordered the digital deluxe edition) but then move on - just as I have from every other fps game that I have played. |
|
|
4/12/12 7:23:38 AM#169
Originally posted by tordurbar
This made me laugh. You will be in for a rude shock. |
|
|
4/12/12 11:17:38 AM#170
Trinity is very much alive in this game. Its just dressed differently. I have to say I like the way its dressed in GW2 but fact is someone in the team will damage mitigate (everyone), someone will cast heal (everyone) and someone will focus on DPS (everyone). Some will lean to some rolls more then others. I know my wife really wants to spec deeply into water just to be the helping hand in fights. GJ ANet but this game did not kill the Trinity.
|
|
|
4/12/12 1:05:45 PM#171
So what game in the last 6 years has used the holy trinity anyway??? Everything lately has just been "the game is so easy you dont need anyone else or to play any role"......IF there is little or no heals then that tells me either A) the players are overpowered or B) the content is too easy......We will see how it plays out but Im guessing the game is easy. |
|
|
4/12/12 2:53:22 PM#172
Originally posted by terrant Alright, presuming the game plays the way Anet says it will, and thus far all video evidence I've seen seems to support it...There will be 5 heals in every party. There will be 5 dps in every party. There will be 5 controllers in every party. There will be 5 tanks in every party. There will be five people in every party. And they will fill ALL roles. Your role as a member in a GW2 Party is: 1) Provide sufficient damage to kill all enemies in the most efficient way possible 2) Stay alive using a combination of movement, delf heals, and defensive skills. 3) Use debuffs/lockdowns to reduce all incoming enemy damage in any worthwhile way you can 4) Provide any healing to other members when needed 5) Attract enemy attention to draw off from a wounded team mate 6) Revive fallen team members And the most important one of all: 7) Think of the fly, adapt to the changing battlefield, and know when to apply the first 6. Then DO IT. Originally posted by terrant Exactly, Roles loose there meaning when everyone needs to be on the ball and be dynamic! This will work fine if everyone is totally selfish and just plays "solo" in a group or event (OMG this may be a reason to have it work this way :P ) Do damage when you can, dodge and heal when you have to, help others when you want. Given the current model if everyone plays like this they will do OK. But, if they start working as a team and start overlapping area heals to help restore people that just got bashed, taking on and handing off mobs when needed to help others recover, getting your licks in and setting up combos for extra effect, changing weapons and aspects constantly as needed to maximize the attack/defense. . . . the group being a team will function better. But as a team of equals with some cool extra talents ( Not a tank, Healer and DPS ) * As no one can tank in the traditional sense (no aggro control and no real staying power) * As no one can just heal as there is no single target-able heals and the AOE heals are low power dots (best used overlapped or as a bonus) completely not useful in keeping a character alive in a sustained attack. * As no one can just DPS as they Will be attacked directly for doing so. From people playing in the Beta's over and over, if you do not adapt dynamically and use your skills creatively you will be dieing allot. It takes a good team to keep the boss de-buffed and controlled as much as possible and rotate damaging, getting smashed for doing so, getting the heck out of there, and healing up for another go. You have to change weapons/aspect you have to use your skills and you have to move around. The Trinity as commonly defined, requires Aggro control, a damage sink, healing for the damage sink (normally dedicated and massive), and DPS to burn the mob down. Yes, you can have off tanks, yes secondary healers or hybrids filling secondary roles (or very very specialized hybrids - almost a oxymoron that may be good enough for the main roles ) But these are all variants on a theme. And it all comes down to aggro control! Without aggro control you can't have the Trinity as commonly defined. Also being able to heal does not make you a healer (in GW you really can't be by design the most you can do is AID) Being able to take a few hits does not make you into a tank, as no one in GW2 can take sustained damage and since there is no real massive heals . . and for the main reason there is no Aggro control, as soon as you go all defensive the mob may just move on to someone else. Able to do massive damage? well expect the mob to be coming to you! you may need to do defensive and get out of there quick. While doing all of this your teammates can be aiding with some needed but minor healing since you just blew yours . . they may slow or bind the Mob to help you escape. and most importantly do some good damage on there own and get the Mob off your back, or res you when they can't. |
|
|
4/12/12 11:48:10 PM#173
Below is what Eric Flannum (Lead Designer, ArenaNet) had to say about the trinity in GW2. Sorry if it was already posted, just skimmed through the second half of the thread. Sorry badSpock, you could have used this earlier to try an get across what you were saying.
“Players could make a build that resembles the trinity but it could never truly be the trinity. You cannot for example make a dedicated healer no matter how much you pump into your support trait lines. When you start getting to tougher encounters no matter how much armor and health you have you will never be able to stand toe to toe for long against most of the foes you’ll face. Because of this even a 5 person group that has 3 dps focused characters, a support focused character, and a damage soaking character (which is a standard trinity setup) will not play anything like a standard trinity group. If those players insisted on playing like a standard trinity group they could succeed against the easier content in the game but probably couldn’t finish a story mode dungeon let alone an explorable dungeon or some of the tougher events in the game. “ He then went on to make a more lengthy second post which read - “To go a little bit more in depth with the answer I gave, it doesn’t really matter which professions you bring. Over the beta weekend I played through the dungeon with several different journalists and getting through was never a matter of bringing particular professions or even changing the builds that people were using. When we hit a tough patch people would change which weapons or utilities they were using but nobody ever had to go respec their traits. I was in groups that wiped multiple times in story mode but I was also in groups that did not wipe at all in story mode and was in one group that made it through explorable mode (we wiped a lot in that one). It all came down to how well we coordinated and how well we responded to the situations we encountered. For example, in the explorable run through I think it was two journalists who were both warriors (one may have been a guardian, I’m having trouble recalling), our producer Chris Whiteside with a ranger, Izzy playing an elementalist, and myself playing an engineer. At different times Izzy was our condition removal guy, our debuffer, and our “tank” (bait is a more appropriate term actually). He was our most important player because he was our best player but he was actually very support/healing specced. The important thing about that group was that we were all talking and coordinating our efforts and coming up with strategies together. Those strategies never really revolved around specific skills but rather things like “We need condition removal” or “we need to stack as much vulnerability on this guy as possible” or even “we need Izzy to run around attracting attention while the rest of us activate the traps built into the area to kill the hordes of incoming mobs”. I hope that helps shed some light on how the game plays.” |
|
|
4/13/12 8:46:22 PM#174
Originally posted by Faelan Did you even play second edition AD&D? A backstabbing rogue was a DPS machine.... 4x at level 10. Sure things were situational...but comparing what you can do in a PnP game and a scripted MMO is like comparing apples and oranges. When it came down to it, combat was still pretty much healer, ranged dps, melee dps, and a tank of sorts. |
|
|
4/15/12 4:28:33 AM#175
The simple matter is that the holy trinity has been used in other WoW style mmorpgs that set its meaning to - DEDICATED HEAL/TANK/DPS roles... By dedicated I mean you can play a druid that can be dps/healer/tank but you can't play all of the roles at the same time, hence you only play one role Sure GW2 has Heals and protection(not tanking though) but they are so alien to other games that you can not simply say its a Holy Trinity. How about we all settle in on a new name? Active Trinity sounds way better to me :)  |
|
|
Faelan
Apprentice Member
Joined: 11/13/04
Oops - looks like I'm an internet dog who somehow learned how to type. What has the world come to? |
4/17/12 2:49:19 PM#176
Originally posted by stevebmbsqd Did you since you're constantly asking other people if they did? Notice that I've already stated that I did a lot of 2nd ed AD&D back in the day. Did you even read my post? So, I went back and looked at the rules to see if I/we interpreted something wrong back in the day that could justify your claim (haven't been playing 2nd AD&D for 12 years). What I found there just confirmed my conclusion that the thief is not a DPS machine in 2nd ed AD&D. His backstab simply doesn't support that compared to the fighter. The rules clearly state that backstab bonus only applies on his first attack, only when target is unaware of the thief and only from behind, only against humanoids and the backstab modifier (x4 at 10th level as you correctly state) only applies to the base damage of the weapon which is something like 1D6 with a shortsword (most popular thief weapon when I was playing), not magical plusses, STR bonus and what else. So if he rolls 4 with the die, that's some 12 points of extra damage due to a backstab over normal attack damage if using a x4 damage multiplier. Meanwhile, the 10th level fighter gets an extra attack per round due to weapon specialization which can easily dish out 12 points or more due to bigger weapon, more STR modifiers and weapon spec bonus. Furthermore, he can do this every round whereas it's silly to assume the thief can pull off a backstab every round unless the player managed to bribe the DM into ignoring both the rules and common sense with enough slices of free pizza. Heck, a lot of the time you're not even fighting humanoids, so you're left with no backstab and regular thief THAC0/weapon damage isn't exactly all that great and certainly not better than the fighter. So unless you're willing to come up with some concrete combat examples, either by yourself or somewhere on the net, that supports your opinion of the thief being a DPS machine in general, not just some very specific special cases, I'm going to call BS on this one. Feel free to disagree. As for the whole apples and oranges. That's the same conclusion I came to, which is why it's safe to say that the holy trinity wasn't invented by pen and paper. Again, did you read my post? The individual roles as you state, sure, no argument there, but they were not combined in the strict way we see it in MMOs. There were no aggro or taunt mechanics in AD&D, which is crucial in making the holy trinity work. All the tank could do was get in the way and hope that the monsters wouldn't ignore him and go for the squishy targets first. Often, that was not the case. At least not in the countless games that I had the chance to play in or DM myself. Orcs may not be the sharpest tools in the shed, but they know the guy in a robe with a staff or dagger means trouble and that you shouldn't turn your back to a guy in leather armor wielding one or two light stabby weapons. I'm a big ol' fluffy carewolf. Be afraid. Be very afraid. |
|
4/20/12 10:09:06 AM#177
I think you are missing the point! Agruing over AD&D rules?!? OMG Gary Gygax style D&D computer games (starting text based / character graphics) Where simple (even rudimentary) approximations of the table top game that COULD be as complex as you wanted to make it. Computers really did not have the capability to do anything else. The beginning framework STARTED then! Hit-points, mana, Armor, gold, dungeons, ever looking for better weapons and loot etc. GUILDWARS 2 is attempting to break out of this overused mold! And good for them the old trend and expectation was getting toxic. (though I think most new MMO's have seen this and where very very slowly adding elements to enhance there games (a bit of too little too late in most cases) So did AD&D make the "trinity"? directly? no but definitely indirectly, but the greatest factor is limitation in computers and networking/internet at the time and the conventions and shortcuts used to mitigate them. We should not be ruled by obsolete limitations from a bygone decade. Be creative and have fun. |
|
|
Faelan
Apprentice Member
Joined: 11/13/04
Oops - looks like I'm an internet dog who somehow learned how to type. What has the world come to? |
4/21/12 8:11:12 AM#178
Originally posted by ta_erog Excellent post. That's how I feel as well. AD&D did have character combat roles that one can interpret as the components required to make the holy trinity but it didn't really play out that way. Combat was much more organic than that because the players and monsters were being controlled by real people rather than some primitive scripted AI. The holy trinity is purely an MMO invention to make life easier where AI programming, CPU resources and encounter balancing is concerned. I'm a big ol' fluffy carewolf. Be afraid. Be very afraid. |
|
4/27/12 8:09:47 AM#179
Originally posted by GeezerGamer So how does that make them different from GW2? Seeing as all they did was rebadge the "trinity" and call them something else. All in all they are still Tank-Healer-DPS just called different things. And thats what I was mostly pointing out, that and there are other games out there that have done this prior to GW2. So much crap, so little quality. |
|
Friends: vgchartz.com
Not a member? You can still subscribe to our newsletters and daily updates here!
May 19, 2013 11:01 PM
- Page Created in 3.572 seconds -
