Originally posted by Lonzo

The Trinity is the only way to go, since that is the point how group and teamplay works. The Trinity is fun, you have to work together in groups. The GW2 is just button mashing without a brain.

 

The future is trinity!!!

The holy trinity splits in three games:

1. "I hold the attention of all the mobs/tank" aka "looking at threath bars".

2. "I watch the health bars, especially the bar of the guy holding mob attention, and if it goes down I click on it" aka wackamole.

3."I shoot and if it isn't to hard I move out of green goo" aka as pewpewpew.

So 3 games being play side by side is teamplay while GW2 where people can do all of the 3 but never for more than a few seconds each, it isn't.

Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

Originally posted by Lonzo

The Trinity is the only way to go, since that is the point how group and teamplay works. The Trinity is fun, you have to work together in groups. The GW2 is just button mashing without a brain.

 

The future is trinity!!!

The holy trinity splits in three games:

1. "I hold the attention of all the mobs/tank" aka "looking at threath bars".

2. "I watch the health bars, especially the bar of the guy holding mob attention, and if it goes down I click on it" aka wackamole.

3."I shoot and if it isn't to hard I move out of green goo" aka as pewpewpew.

So 3 games being play side by side is teamplay while GW2 where people can do all of the 3 but never for more than a few seconds each, it isn't.

 lets not forget that the trinity has been around a long time and GW2 is a first mainstream stab at a non trinity. With a few tweaks to support i believe the gw2 model is far superior, especially if the game has any pvp.

I love the trinity because it creates interdependence if you want to create compelling group content. For me Everquest is the perfect example of this, a tank can't solo, they rely on a cleric and both then rely on dps. It works incredibly well. That's all I have to say about it, maybe it's boring, or outdated for some, but it still works the best I think.

Everquest also added and went to 5 or 6 instead of trinity with 3. Tank + healer + dps + slower + puller + CC, but the most important is still the trinity.

Originally posted by ignore_me

I personally hate the trinity but a friend of mine has argued somewhat convincingly that you cannot escape the trinity in MMORPGs.

Argument: In GW2 the dungeons seem to involve a lot of dying and rezzing to respawn point because there is no tank to soak all of the damage and slow things down. My friend argues that this demonstrates the need for the trinity in order to avoid the high rate of attrition and respawn in boss fights compared to other games.

Anyone agree with that idea?

 

Well if anyone thinks the Trinity is redundant, all they have to do is to play GW2 dungeons.

Now I know why Anet scrapped the Raids..................

Originally posted by ignore_me

I personally hate the trinity but a friend of mine has argued somewhat convincingly that you cannot escape the trinity in MMORPGs.

Argument: In GW2 the dungeons seem to involve a lot of dying and rezzing to respawn point because there is no tank to soak all of the damage and slow things down. My friend argues that this demonstrates the need for the trinity in order to avoid the high rate of attrition and respawn in boss fights compared to other games.

Anyone agree with that idea?

 

 If done right the trinity can be avoided. look at a game called Asherons Call. Its a skill based game with multiple ways to heal yourself, you could get life magic and heal yourself or others, or you can get healing skill wich requires health kits and you can heal yourself or others. but you never need a person to be a " tank " or " healer " in that game. the mobs will never just sit agro because a person hit it first and there is zero taunts. and sitting back just healing doesnt cut it in that game.

its based on characters being able to fight multiple mobs on their own and be able to tank them and heal plus do damage on their own.

people might think that you wouldnt need others then if you can do all that yourself, but its not true because in that game you will be swarmed by mobs im talking 30+ mobs at once and you need others to take some of that off of you.

Its hard to explain the whole thing because the post would just be to long, but trust me its very possible that game has been doing it for 13 years now.

Originally posted by ste2000

Originally posted by ignore_me

I personally hate the trinity but a friend of mine has argued somewhat convincingly that you cannot escape the trinity in MMORPGs.

Argument: In GW2 the dungeons seem to involve a lot of dying and rezzing to respawn point because there is no tank to soak all of the damage and slow things down. My friend argues that this demonstrates the need for the trinity in order to avoid the high rate of attrition and respawn in boss fights compared to other games.

Anyone agree with that idea?

 

Well if anyone thinks the Trinity is redundant, all they have to do is to play GW2 dungeons.

Now I know why Anet scrapped the Raids..................

 i dont like the running back either and that is why i believe tweaks are necessary. Healing is too weak, and pve crowd control is also far to weak. There is also little defence against mass aoe other than dodging. However i think the premise of active combat is far better than the trinity so i think it needs to be tweaked, not written off.

You have to have strong crowd control in a game where you dont have the trinity and i think they missed the mark on that point. Healing is actually not bad, but its a little weak. i think they would of been better off not having a healing skill and just adding 10k hp to everyone to let them last a few more hits.

i would wager if you gave everyone the extra 10k from the heal skill, uppped healing by 10-15% and increased pve crowd control by a factor of 5x or so the game would be alot smoother in the dungeons.

Originally posted by ShakyMo
But you can run any group in coh
My regular group was
2 controllers, me doing gravity cc, with radiation debuffs & off heals. Another doing illusion control (like mes in gw2) and force fields (which was our primary "heals")
2 scrappers focusing same target
1 defender doing dark dps and drains

CoH is pretty much the only game I've ever enjoyed grouping in, and it's for exactly the reason you describe. Sure, some combinations in the game are a little more "set it and forget it," but you could literally combine anyone and succeed. 100% of my leveling in CoH was done in PUGs, because PUGs were just all kinds of fun! You never knew what your group makeup would be, and that lead to all kinds of fun combinations that really changed the way we approached encounters. That unpredictability may be an unpleasant idea to some people, but I absolutely loved it.

The Trinity is the law in any group gaming with RPG-like elements.

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by Purutzil

Well GW2 DOES infact have a trinity, involving Support/Damage/Crowd Control. Its not as clean as a normal trinity which is why it can be messy but lacking it will make dungeons very difficult.

They are two different things. Offense, defense and support are common roles in ANY battle - real, videogame or otherwise - but that isn't the trinty. The trinity is specifically Tank, DPS, Healer. The tank is based on taunt/aggro mechanics. Without taunt, the class is useless.

+1. Probably works as a system more in quest-combat centric gameplay? If those change, perhaps taunt makes even less sense (not that it ever made any sense when I first came across it)?

Why I don't like Guild Wars 2 combat is that I don't really feel like part of a team. Some of the time, everyone in my group dies, except for me, in a boss fight, and I sit there beating away at the boss, like I would be if they did not die.

The trinity forces you to absolutely need others, which can also be seen as bad, but the interdependence has a nice feeling.

Groups can work together very well in Guild Wars 2, but it's usually just me versus the boss, with some other people doing whatever--helping, dying, meh.

I believe advocaters of either side simply differ in mindset and perception. I prefer trinity most of the time and dabbling in non-trinity every now and again when I want to do solo content, so to speak.

I put down combo fields when everyone is up and able to capitalize them, as well as use combo fields whenever I see them.

It still doesn't feel clutch or anything. You may feel otherwise. Also, some bosses having resistances to conditions kind of kills it arbitrarily.

Anyway, you clearly like Guild Wars 2. That's fine.

Originally posted by aphydork

Why I don't like Guild Wars 2 combat is that I don't really feel like part of a team. Some of the time, everyone in my group dies, except for me, in a boss fight, and I sit there beating away at the boss, like I would be if they did not die.

The trinity forces you to absolutely need others, which can also be seen as bad, but the interdependence has a nice feeling.

Groups can work together very well in Guild Wars 2, but it's usually just me versus the boss, with some other people doing whatever--helping, dying, meh.

I believe advocaters of either side simply differ in mindset and perception. I prefer trinity most of the time and dabbling in non-trinity every now and again when I want to do solo content, so to speak.

 i believe thats not necessarily because of the trinity but because they have handicapped crowd control in that game. You cant lock down a mob for more than  6 or so seconds in GW2 to my knowledge, and for me thats a problem. I have been able to offtank with my guardian, and as well i have been able to provide alot of healing and condition removal to the team. You have to spec for it and most dont.

I like how you cant easily make a mob attack you but at the same time i think if your going to do this you need strong crowd control, not weak crowd control to compensate for this. I also think they overdid it on healing and restricted it a little too much, maybe 10-20% to weak. I actually prefer the boon method to buffing and i also believe that the healing model they use is superior to cast heal on target x, but like all new things, it needs a little refinement.

Originally posted by ignore_me

Originally posted by colddog04
In Gw2 dungeons, people die a lot because they suck a lot - not because there is no trinity.

so sucking as in trying to use trinity tactics in a non-trinity fight? Or do you mean just plain incompetent with class abilities/hitting buttons/timing?

Its more about brining the right skills to the right dungeons. Condition removal builds will do more for you than any pseudo-tanks or pseudo-healers in Twilight Arbor. And bringing condition removal doesnt make you a 'healer'.

Originally posted by Bladestrom
Focus on combo fields and reacting with correct triggers depending on what is needed by others. The team work is there- a lot more than 1 person tanking. 3 dpsing and 1 healing. I find a lot of my time spent laying stuff down to Protect Others - Aren't you doing this?

Yep combo fields are definitely under-rated, but can make or break a group.

Necromancers are often seen as the weakest class, but they have the strongest combo fields in the form of lifestealing.

If I recall correctly the trinity in EQ was more tank/healer/crowd control.  Been a long time so I maybe mis-remebering, but a enchanter could make or break a group.  

I think alot of the problems with EQ's trinity was at the time I was playing, the cleric was the only class that would rez, (necros could but it required essence emeralds), and the only class that could complete heal. So they were far and above the most desired healing class, and enchanters were the go to for crowd control.  Sure monks could split mobs, but I also recall that being a little iffy, and very dependant on the monks skill.  I never really grouped with bards so I am not overly sure how well they could crowd  control.

So you ended up with a very hard set trinity, as 2 group roles were mostly reserved for 2 classes.  Sk and paladins could tank well enough that the tank role was a lot more flexible for xp groups.  The death penalty also made you quite risk adverse, so if you filled those 2 roles with anyone other than Enc/Cleric especially in a pug you were taking quite a risk. 

The trinty isn't really a problem for me, I like the fact that if you are the tank/healer/CC you step up and take responsabilty for how you play in a group, this also made the dps more responsable for their aggro management.   

It's not unavoidable, but I do think it can make for a better group dynamic.  If everyone has a role in a group then you actually need people to step up and fill that role.  It's not really the trinty but how flexible that is,  and how much variety in the tasks outside of it are.

Originally posted by Grochie

If I recall correctly the trinity in EQ was more tank/healer/crowd control.  Been a long time so I maybe mis-remebering, but a enchanter could make or break a group.  

I think alot of the problems with EQ's trinity was at the time I was playing, the cleric was the only class that would rez, (necros could but it required essence emeralds), and the only class that could complete heal. So they were far and above the most desired healing class, and enchanters were the go to for crowd control.  Sure monks could split mobs, but I also recall that being a little iffy, and very dependant on the monks skill.  I never really grouped with bards so I am not overly sure how well they could crowd  control.

So you ended up with a very hard set trinity, as 2 group roles were mostly reserved for 2 classes.  Sk and paladins could tank well enough that the tank role was a lot more flexible for xp groups.  The death penalty also made you quite risk adverse, so if you filled those 2 roles with anyone other than Enc/Cleric especially in a pug you were taking quite a risk. 

The trinty isn't really a problem for me, I like the fact that if you are the tank/healer/CC you step up and take responsabilty for how you play in a group, this also made the dps more responsable for their aggro management.   

It's not unavoidable, but I do think it can make for a better group dynamic.  If everyone has a role in a group then you actually need people to step up and fill that role.  It's not really the trinty but how flexible that is,  and how much variety in the tasks outside of it are.

Originally posted by Rimmersman

Originally posted by Grochie

If I recall correctly the trinity in EQ was more tank/healer/crowd control.  Been a long time so I maybe mis-remebering, but a enchanter could make or break a group.  

I think alot of the problems with EQ's trinity was at the time I was playing, the cleric was the only class that would rez, (necros could but it required essence emeralds), and the only class that could complete heal. So they were far and above the most desired healing class, and enchanters were the go to for crowd control.  Sure monks could split mobs, but I also recall that being a little iffy, and very dependant on the monks skill.  I never really grouped with bards so I am not overly sure how well they could crowd  control.

So you ended up with a very hard set trinity, as 2 group roles were mostly reserved for 2 classes.  Sk and paladins could tank well enough that the tank role was a lot more flexible for xp groups.  The death penalty also made you quite risk adverse, so if you filled those 2 roles with anyone other than Enc/Cleric especially in a pug you were taking quite a risk. 

The trinty isn't really a problem for me, I like the fact that if you are the tank/healer/CC you step up and take responsabilty for how you play in a group, this also made the dps more responsable for their aggro management.   

It's not unavoidable, but I do think it can make for a better group dynamic.  If everyone has a role in a group then you actually need people to step up and fill that role.  It's not really the trinty but how flexible that is,  and how much variety in the tasks outside of it are.

 

All the things i loved about EQ every clsss had it's role, you realised at an early stage that knowing your class reaped the rewards. A wizard and druid were the only classes that could transport you round the world up until POP. I really hope smed goes back to basics with EQNext, he has already said the classes will have more in common with EQ than EQ2 just like Vanguards classes are more akin to EQ.

I agree. I love the trinity, to me an essential part of any RPG. I also like playing each role, usually a tank more than most.

To answer the OP's question .........to me it is unavoidable, for me. It takes away traditional RPG elements, and thats why I play these MMORPG'S. If I wanted to play a straight dps game, well, I play plenty of BF3