When I read they were going to release an elder scroll online, I thought it was a great idea...

Now, reading a bit on the left and right, I came to learn that the game WON'T have an aggro system. Seriously, after GW2 failfest I don't understand why company still try to go that way. Even in GW2 high end players were recreating a holy trinity by using game gimmicks, which was far from being fun let me add.

Being a tank in every game that I play (single player too when I can...), this is simply a big fun killer for me. The holy trinity is nothing but efficient tactic.

I don't know, make the game not REQUIRE holy trinity, why not give it a try... But simply DENYING this aspect by not having aggro system at all is just wrong from my point of view.

I will probably try the game nonetheless, but my hopes for this game went from high to underground with this.

Sources:

http://www.elderscrollsguides.com/the-elder-scrolls-online-leaked-info-so-far/

http://www.rpgamer.com/news/Q4-2012/102212a.html

Originally posted by ShakyMo
From what I understand TESO while it has healers doesn't have traditional tanks or any threat mechanics

That's my understanding too considering they said someone could play a sneaky healer...

But no threat mechanic to go with is a shame.

Originally posted by Khelden

Being a tank in every game that I play (single player too when I can...), this is simply a big fun killer for me. The holy trinity is nothing but efficient tactic.

 I don't know, make the game not REQUIRE holy trinity, why not give it a try... But simply DENYING this aspect by not having aggro system at all is just wrong from my point of view.

 

Aggro systems are lazy hold overs from the past.  The trinity doesn't require an aggro system, and IMO would be much more fun without it.  Then again I am in favor of virtually any change that eliminates the DDR feel of group PvE.

"Doing it right" would be a ton more work.  You'd need positional blocking, an AI with a threat vs proximity metric and release/retarget subroutine, plus a few other considerations (friendly fire for example).  Sadly though, even if it were to be executed perfectly, the game would fail.  That leap in complexity would alienate too many players that want (need is probably the better word) the static encounter to be "epic".

*snip* Sadly though, even if it were to be executed perfectly, the game would fail.  That leap in complexity would alienate too many players that want (need is probably the better word) the static encounter to be "epic".

I don't know about failing, but you need go no further than GW2 to see this play out.  You get some really good players that work togother and do the content with w/e mix of classes is available.

Then you have people, like the OP, who can't hack it outside the trinity and think everything else sucks.

Originally posted by ghstwolf

Originally posted by Khelden

Being a tank in every game that I play (single player too when I can...), this is simply a big fun killer for me. The holy trinity is nothing but efficient tactic.

 I don't know, make the game not REQUIRE holy trinity, why not give it a try... But simply DENYING this aspect by not having aggro system at all is just wrong from my point of view.

 

 

Aggro systems are lazy hold overs from the past.  The trinity doesn't require an aggro system, and IMO would be much more fun without it.  Then again I am in favor of virtually any change that eliminates the DDR feel of group PvE.

"Doing it right" would be a ton more work.  You'd need positional blocking, an AI with a threat vs proximity metric and release/retarget subroutine, plus a few other considerations (friendly fire for example).  Sadly though, even if it were to be executed perfectly, the game would fail.  That leap in complexity would alienate too many players that want (need is probably the better word) the static encounter to be "epic".

I disagree, I think aggro system is something which adds a lot to the game, whatever the way it is done. I wouldn't mind playing in an environment with temporary threat management, where the monster can pretty much attack randomly but where there are a few taunts to manage the situation. For example, during a special phase or to save an ally. I would even enjoy it.

But as it seems right now, after the huge fail of GW2 system where everybody was on his own,  TESO is going for the Healer is responsible for everybody.

Let's not forget, also, that unless the sword/mace and shield warrior deals as much damage as a dual-wield or two-handed warrior, the fact that there is no threat will most likely make him unwanted for high end groups where efficiency matters. 

There are a lot of stuff to be improved in the MMO industry, but I'm fairly sure that harming the possibility of playing the role we want isn't something great.

Originally posted by ShakyMo
From what I understand TESO while it has healers doesn't have traditional tanks or any threat mechanics

If that's true, the healers better be able to take care of themselves as well as the group or no one is going to play the healing pin cushion.  The problem I have with games like GW2 is that the combat mechanic is based around death and ressurecting rather than focusing on survival.  All of the hard encounters are designed specifically to kill people and success is determined more on attentive rezzing than anything else.

Every argument people use,is still possible inside the Trinity.

IMO it is simply a case of lazy or cheap developers.

I can use one example and it comes form the develoepr that puts the most effort into their design,Square.

The sub class system,gives you the ability to be versatile and acheive anything all on the same player,no need for wasting time on alts.Yo uwant some dps with healing,you go it.You don't liek trinity,no one is saying inside of FFXI design that you have to use it.

The bottom line is Hate/Aggro/Trinity are all about organized game play.Anything taking those away is creating a sloppy game design.At least FFXI gives you the choice,the anti Trinity games give you no choice,just grab a class and go in guns a blazing,whoever gets hate get it,nothing organized.Whgo is healing?We don't know,just go in and fight,we will figure it out as we fight.Oh wait we can kill in 3 hits no need for healing,just grab the most dps you can muster.

Like i said if you want that sloppy game play,you can still do it inside the trinity design.using the argument i noticed,unless you can't hack the challenge?

You are not going to get a more Trinity based game than FFXI but if you are smart and understand your class,Almost anything can make up a group.Geesh i remember befriending a black mage who asked me to team up. Ithought no way we die fast.He was smart he lined up far opposite side and we bounced hate back n forth,the mob never got close enough to hit us.If we did get hit,it was only once then the mob darted for the other guy.Yo uca ngo blm/ninja for shadows and still take many hits with no damage,the key is game design and versatility,GOOD games have it.

Originally posted by Wizardry

Every argument people use,is still possible inside the Trinity.

IMO it is simply a case of lazy or cheap developers.

I can use one example and it comes form the develoepr that puts the most effort into their design,Square.

The sub class system,gives you the ability to be versatile and acheive anything all on the same player,no need for wasting time on alts.Yo uwant some dps with healing,you go it.You don't liek trinity,no one is saying inside of FFXI design that you have to use it.

The bottom line is Hate/Aggro/Trinity are all about organized game play.Anything taking those away is creating a sloppy game design.At least FFXI gives you the choice,the anti Trinity games give you no choice,just grab a class and go in guns a blazing,whoever gets hate get it,nothing organized.Whgo is healing?We don't know,just go in and fight,we will figure it out as we fight.Oh wait we can kill in 3 hits no need for healing,just grab the most dps you can muster.

Like i said if you want that sloppy game play,you can still do it inside the trinity design.using the argument i noticed,unless you can't hack the challenge?

You are not going to get a more Trinity based game than FFXI but if you are smart and understand your class,Almost anything can make up a group.Geesh i remember befriending a black mage who asked me to team up. Ithought no way we die fast.He was smart he lined up far opposite side and we bounced hate back n forth,the mob never got close enough to hit us.If we did get hit,it was only once then the mob darted for the other guy.Yo uca ngo blm/ninja for shadows and still take many hits with no damage,the key is game design and versatility,GOOD games have it.

Darn A Tale In The Desert, with its lack of a trinity and obviously sloppy game design.  They must have lazy and cheap developers.

Originally posted by Khelden

When I read they were going to release an elder scroll online, I thought it was a great idea...

Now, reading a bit on the left and right, I came to learn that the game WON'T have an aggro system. Seriously, after GW2 failfest I don't understand why company still try to go that way. Even in GW2 high end players were recreating a holy trinity by using game gimmicks, which was far from being fun let me add.

Being a tank in every game that I play (single player too when I can...), this is simply a big fun killer for me. The holy trinity is nothing but efficient tactic.

I don't know, make the game not REQUIRE holy trinity, why not give it a try... But simply DENYING this aspect by not having aggro system at all is just wrong from my point of view.

I will probably try the game nonetheless, but my hopes for this game went from high to underground with this.

Doing something different doesn't mean they are "anti" your favored system. It just means they are doing something different.

On another note, the trinity/aggro design is "efficient tactic" in MMOs with no CD, strict roles and arranged combat with incredibly stupid opponents. The more the game deviates from the formula the less efficient the trinity is.

GW2 didn't get rid of the trinity.. all they did was make the current person getting hit the tank, and everyone the healer after that person goes into the down state.

Instead of taking a sidestep in mechanics and trying something new they took a step backwards into a land that no game bothered implementing before because you could see it was fail before you even tried.

Originally posted by Zyzra
Anti-Holy Trinity?  Probably just some people who are likely to get coal in their stocking.

I would like to see the link too.  It would be slightly disappointing

Originally posted by Vorthanion

Originally posted by ShakyMo
From what I understand TESO while it has healers doesn't have traditional tanks or any threat mechanics

If that's true, the healers better be able to take care of themselves as well as the group or no one is going to play the healing pin cushion.  The problem I have with games like GW2 is that the combat mechanic is based around death and ressurecting rather than focusing on survival.  All of the hard encounters are designed specifically to kill people and success is determined more on attentive rezzing than anything else.

What? GW2 combat mechanic based around death and res?? If you're success is determined more on attentive rezzing than anything else, you obviously don't know how to play or just don't understand the mechanics of the game well. In a good group, its completely possible to do every single dungeons without having to rez anyone 1 single time if you know what you're doing. And some can be really challenging before you figure them out.

oh god please no. The age of GW2 clones is coming upon us.

That must be what the Mayans have predicted. :(

Originally posted by SirFubar

Originally posted by Vorthanion

Originally posted by ShakyMo
From what I understand TESO while it has healers doesn't have traditional tanks or any threat mechanics

If that's true, the healers better be able to take care of themselves as well as the group or no one is going to play the healing pin cushion.  The problem I have with games like GW2 is that the combat mechanic is based around death and ressurecting rather than focusing on survival.  All of the hard encounters are designed specifically to kill people and success is determined more on attentive rezzing than anything else.

What? GW2 combat mechanic based around death and res?? If you're success is determined more on attentive rezzing than anything else, you obviously don't know how to play or just don't understand the mechanics of the game well. In a good group, its completely possible to do every single dungeons without having to rez anyone 1 single time if you know what you're doing. And some can be really challenging before you figure them out.

Yeah it's pretty obvious that the game's mechanics (still) hasn't sunk in yet for some people. The mere fact that others can conquer what they can't attests to that, but they prefer to blame it on the game.

I don't know what the frack is this talk about GW2's combat mega-failing, but I really prefer not being rejected in a group because I can't do anything else aside from DPSing, where in any MMO is the most abundant archetype. Maybe because I always pick the DPS class, and this game gives me the ability to tank and heal all at the same time. Natural tanks and healers may be feeling sore because they're no longer that special in GW2, and by extension in this game.

Originally posted by bcbully

Originally posted by Zyzra
Anti-Holy Trinity?  Probably just some people who are likely to get coal in their stocking.

I would like to see the link too.  It would be slightly disappointing

http://www.elderscrollsguides.com/the-elder-scrolls-online-leaked-info-so-far/

http://www.rpgamer.com/news/Q4-2012/102212a.html