Originally posted by tixylix

I never saw a problem with how WoW did it, with talents you could play many roles. I mean as a Druid I could play Tank, Damage dealer or a healer and yet the trinity still existed because you couldn't do it all at the same time. As a priest I could be a healer or a damage dealer and every class had at least two roles. It's the best class system out of any MMO I've played which uses one.

Sadly though WoW got turned to shit.

Well, just out of curiosity, which 2 roles were available to rogues, locks and qqers err, mages ?

But i agree with the last sentence, even if we would probably disagree on the exact point in time.

Flame on!

:)

Originally posted by Serelisk

Originally posted by SavageHorizon

I'm glad you love GW2's system, you can play GW2 and we who like the trinity can play games like TESO.

 

Everyone is happy, right?

I wish it was like that... Sigh. Then again, people can justly express their opinions. But there's a clear spread misinformation still on how GW2's system actually works. (6 months in, amazing right? lol) I guess it's okay to just say we're immune to valid criticism whenever we try to explain it. I still like GW2's system because I can play the class I like to play based on the style of play, not the pigeonhole it's ascribed to. So soft trinities are the way to go methinks. 

Please note: The Holy Trinity only refers to concrete and non-flexible systems like WoW where there's a dedicated tank, a dedicated healer, and the rest pew pew with no in between. 

 

I played GW2 to level 80 on a norn ranger and 54 with a female norn thief.

As for the holy trinity, please don't try to school me on it i've played MMO's since 1999.

Thanks.

Trinity is best in my opinion but it's like i said.

You can keep enjoying GW2 while the people who like the trinity system can enjoy games like TESO and ArcheAge or any number of MMO's that still use that system.

Thank goodness most devs don't see it the same way ArenaNet do.

Originally posted by Banaghran

Originally posted by tixylix

I never saw a problem with how WoW did it, with talents you could play many roles. I mean as a Druid I could play Tank, Damage dealer or a healer and yet the trinity still existed because you couldn't do it all at the same time. As a priest I could be a healer or a damage dealer and every class had at least two roles. It's the best class system out of any MMO I've played which uses one.

Sadly though WoW got turned to shit.

Well, just out of curiosity, which 2 roles were available to rogues, locks and qqers err, mages ?

But i agree with the last sentence, even if we would probably disagree on the exact point in time.

Flame on!

:)

For me it was when they made it so you can warp to Battlegrounds, it killed world PVP.

Although I find GW2 to be very fun overall I do miss being able to play a primarily support based character. I don't know that I'd say "Trinity" is best, but the complete lack of being able to focus on playing a support type character in GW2 is far from best for me as well as two of my friends.

Specialization is fun. A person can play many games and take pride in never letting another party member die because they are an awesome healer, or an awesome tank, or an awesome controller, or take pride in being able to do such a massive amount of damage while their support friends keep them up that encounters go very fast. GW2 only allows playing a character that does lots of damage in one form, lots of damage in another form, lots of damage in another form, or some damage in a mix of forms, and then in all of those mix in a tiny bit of support. So all you can take pride in is that you might do a little more damage in a different way without dying compared to everyone else doing a little more damage in another way without dying.

Originally posted by SavageHorizon

Originally posted by Serelisk

Originally posted by SavageHorizon

I'm glad you love GW2's system, you can play GW2 and we who like the trinity can play games like TESO.

 

Everyone is happy, right?

I wish it was like that... Sigh. Then again, people can justly express their opinions. But there's a clear spread misinformation still on how GW2's system actually works. (6 months in, amazing right? lol) I guess it's okay to just say we're immune to valid criticism whenever we try to explain it. I still like GW2's system because I can play the class I like to play based on the style of play, not the pigeonhole it's ascribed to. So soft trinities are the way to go methinks. 

Please note: The Holy Trinity only refers to concrete and non-flexible systems like WoW where there's a dedicated tank, a dedicated healer, and the rest pew pew with no in between. 

 

I played GW2 to level 80 on a norn ranger and 54 with a female norn thief.

As for the holy trinity, please don't try to school me on it i've played MMO's since 1999.

Thanks.

Trinity is best in my opinion but it's like i said.

You can keep enjoying GW2 while the people who like the trinity system can enjoy games like TESO and ArcheAge or any number of MMO's that still use that system.

Pretty simple really options really.

Woah man, sorry for the misunderstanding here. I think we're in agreement, I just sort of used your statement to make a larger comment on this thread and the OP. Most of it was not directed towards you, including but not limited to the note about the trinity. 

Mostly at the OP for saying Holy Trinity and then GW2's methods as basically the only options, when there's a bunch of other MMO's that don't use holy trinity which he's probably lumping into that category. 

Example: Those who have an issue with the "Holy Trinity" don't necessarily have a problem with trinity games. 

Just wanted to clarify my intentions. 

Well, I don't like the GW2 system in the slightest; I would rather have roles more clearly defined.  But at the same time I don't think that definition needs to be provided by the trinity.  

So as many others have pointed out, I can't really answer the OP's question as they are not the only choices available.  

Originally posted by Serelisk

Originally posted by SavageHorizon

Originally posted by Serelisk

Originally posted by SavageHorizon

I'm glad you love GW2's system, you can play GW2 and we who like the trinity can play games like TESO.

 

Everyone is happy, right?

I wish it was like that... Sigh. Then again, people can justly express their opinions. But there's a clear spread misinformation still on how GW2's system actually works. (6 months in, amazing right? lol) I guess it's okay to just say we're immune to valid criticism whenever we try to explain it. I still like GW2's system because I can play the class I like to play based on the style of play, not the pigeonhole it's ascribed to. So soft trinities are the way to go methinks. 

Please note: The Holy Trinity only refers to concrete and non-flexible systems like WoW where there's a dedicated tank, a dedicated healer, and the rest pew pew with no in between. 

 

I played GW2 to level 80 on a norn ranger and 54 with a female norn thief.

As for the holy trinity, please don't try to school me on it i've played MMO's since 1999.

Thanks.

Trinity is best in my opinion but it's like i said.

You can keep enjoying GW2 while the people who like the trinity system can enjoy games like TESO and ArcheAge or any number of MMO's that still use that system.

Pretty simple really options really.

Woah man, sorry for the misunderstanding here. I think we're in agreement, I just sort of used your statement to make a larger comment on this thread and the OP. Most of it was not directed towards you, including but not limited to the note about the trinity. 

Mostly at the OP for saying Holy Trinity and then GW2's methods as basically the only options, when there's a bunch of other MMO's that don't use holy trinity which he's probably lumping into that category. 

Example: Those who have an issue with the "Holy Trinity" don't necessarily have a problem with trinity games. 

Just wanted to clarify my intentions. 

 

Ah i see your point but i wasn't trying to come across as being rude.

I am of the mind that you play what you enjoy at the end of the day. My problem with the OP is that the trinity hasn't gone anywhere it's alive and stronger than ever.

Originally posted by Rydeson
     I hate the holdy trinity.. You end up with a 3 class game..  DPS, Tank and Heals....... I want to see something similar to the original EQ..  I want to see more roles and hybrids, but that isnt' going to happen unless you throw "PvP" and "Raid" balance out the window..  I want a PURE PvE game with a variety of classes to play.. The more the better :)

+1

After all my time playing MMO games I'm not even sure if pvp and pve can exist in the same game and garner huge praise from both crowds.

If it focuses on PvP, the PvE crowd have their fun ruined by people in need of ego massaging and leave.

If it focuses on PvE, the PvP crowd scream and moan about how they should be allowed to kill people whenever they want.

If it tries to blend both then neither side is happy as the compromises harm the game's potential.

I'd rather the developers pick PvE or PvP and stick with it. However, the chasing of WoW level subscriber figures will continue, as they seem unwilling to develop a niche corner of the market, when they could be trying to out-WoW WoW!

Originally posted by tixylix

Originally posted by Banaghran

Originally posted by tixylix

I never saw a problem with how WoW did it, with talents you could play many roles. I mean as a Druid I could play Tank, Damage dealer or a healer and yet the trinity still existed because you couldn't do it all at the same time. As a priest I could be a healer or a damage dealer and every class had at least two roles. It's the best class system out of any MMO I've played which uses one.

Sadly though WoW got turned to shit.

Well, just out of curiosity, which 2 roles were available to rogues, locks and qqers err, mages ?

But i agree with the last sentence, even if we would probably disagree on the exact point in time.

Flame on!

:)

For me it was when they made it so you can warp to Battlegrounds, it killed world PVP.

Yes, we disagree :)

But how about the 2 roles for pures?

Flame on!

:)

Originally posted by aSynchro

Lets check where the Trinity is useful:

_ Leveling : NO. Why level as tank or healer when you can just dps all the way to end game ? Only useful for shorter dungeon queue.

_ Quest: NO. Have you try to do WoW dailies as a healer ? Ah ah!

_ PvP: NO. Tank can't tank players, so it's only a dps with more health but half the damage. As for Healers, well a battleground with zero healers or with same amount of healers in both team don't really change the whole deal.

_ Dungeon : Not really. At first maybe, but with good gear/cc or skilled players you can do it without healer or without tank.

_ Raids: YES/Maybe. For classic tank&spank fights. But you can imagine lots of fights that would works without tanks and healers. Just replace non-avoidable damages with avoidable-if-you-move-fast-enought damages and here you are.

In fact, check WoW raids : lots of encounters don't really need the Trinity. Alysrazor in Fireland has fixed aggro mechanism; same for Garalon in Heart of Fear. Ultraxion in DS only need people to press button at the good time, and what about the vehicule fights in Ulduar, the gunship in Icecrown, the Sha in the last Terrace raid etc etc. Usualy tanks have a very small role. As for healers, they are only usefull because there are non-avoidable damages.

 

I'd also like to point that trinity prevents players from being together.  What do you prefer to hear :

Ultima Online, EVE, Guild Wars 2: "hey, sure: join us and lets have fun together!"

or :

Trinity based MMORPG: "mmh, sorry: we only need a tank/healer now..."

?

All that is changing now though, what with dual spec or Rift's soul system where you can change to what is needed when you need it.  Trinity mechanics don't have to hinder a game anymore as long as devs put in a system where you can change what your role is on the fly.  Didn't have any issue getting groups in Rift or GW2, but I do in WoW or EQ/EQ2 when playing pure dps classes.

Loved GW2 system.  But I loved Rift's much more.  I don't like being locked into a role that is only good in a group centric sense. I liked being able to switch, out of combat, to one of several roles I had built for my character. Rift did it right.

There's trinity and then there's trinity. The difference that affects my enjoyment the most is mob AI and agro mechanics.

WoW gets pretty stale with taunts and high agro generating AOE skills on every tank type. It was kinda fun in TBC when you still had to pay attention to threat meters as DPS and use your agro dumps when needed, but it's at the point now where I hadn't had a threat meter installed in forever when I last played.

DDO does it differently. It's been a long time since I played that one, but the mobs seemed a lot smarter there.  Kobolds right in front of the tank aren't going to turn and run past him because they'll get stabbed in the back, other kobolds will run past that pile and try to get to the squishies in the back. This requires players to know their shit. Tanks gotta be in front and block what they can, squishies have to be in the back and throw out stuff like web or sleep to slow and stop the free mobs and rogues and the like hang out in between when needed to intercept and kill the mobs going after your squishies. 

Both of these cases have the trinity, but the way the developers chose to work it into the game is vastly different.

Not entirely. I do not want to be waiting in a queue because there are too many healers and tanks and not enough dps or vice versa I've been there done that in the past. That is not the future of mmo's if people think that then build a time machine and keep yourself frozen in 1999. 

I'm seeing a little bit of trinity in Neverwinter however, the way they did their system seems to me to be more like STO in that you can have all healer types and still get thru things just fine. It's awesome actually. They didn't put limitations on the scale of abilities. Now how this will effect pvp I'm not sure but we'll see.

I think tho that having healers that can do decent damage and having tanks that do decent damage is a reflection on how Arenanet has influenced the gaming industry and we'll be seeing many many more like it in the future if these developers wish to keep these limitations from affecting the queue times for dungeons if they wish to keep the dungeon system.

gw2's system doesn't make sense when you have several people trying to focus on common enemies. you can defend the game's design all you want, but combat is generally disorganized and not very fun.

classes exist to complement to one another. everquest had a great class system. you had tanks, hybrids that could tank and maybe do a little dps and heal, healers that could debuff, and you had utility classes. to this day, the bard remains one of my favorite classes of all time.

Originally posted by Torvaldr
Dedicated tanks with hate and aggro mechanics can go the way of the dodo (rift, wow, lotro, eq2 style tank mechanics).  I like healing roles, but I don't like snap aggro/tank mechanics. Support, control, buff, debuff, healing, and damage dealing (st, aoe, dot) all make for more interesting combat.

"passive tanking" isnt that fun....wow added some "active tanking"

but if u guys played tera or even skyrim (same system) 2nd button of the mouse to block! thats where the fun is!

@ eq : the problem in eq was that War , were the tanks on endgame , pallys and SK couldn event dream about tanking anything ....

same goes for heals, druid and shammys were usefull (debuffs/buffs) but couldnt heal the same way CLE did

in eq2 that was fixed, all the healers work different , Clerics reactive heals ,Shaman wards and druid hots.

in the tanking eq2 is meh , guardians were the best in vanilla, now? monks outank everything lol