Originally posted by SuperNick

I hated the lack of the trinity.

Been playing MMOs for years now and while I thought it sounded great on paper, I knew it was doomed to fail.

It basically failed on all the expectations I had:

1. I didn't really feel connected to my characters, they were all just DPS to me with some utility.
2. Dungeons were awful, unbalanced and a general mess. How were they ever going to balance it really? I still have nightmares about "hey i'm downed get me up!"
3. With the no trinity, I basically lost playstyles I love. I love tanking and healing, I felt relegated into DPS only. Sure, I could play a fully water specced elementalist but it was generally a waste of time.
4. The PvP basically became 'who can stay alive the longest' which I felt wasn't really tactical at all. It just discouraged you from playing squishy classes and specs overall. 3 guardians a warrior and a ranger became the normal in structured, of which you had a nightmare of a time getting them off flags.
5. Where was the teamwork? Take whatever and whoever into a dungeon, it didn't matter.

There's a couple of other minor things that made me dislike it a lot but yea those are the main ones.

 

So yeah, I hope no game tries that garbage again because I don't think it works at all in an MMO setting. It's like playing an FPS game where they've decided to give everyone the same gun, it's boring as hell.

I'm curious, knowing not having the combat model or the classes you enjoy why did you purchase? 

Originally posted by Dibdabs
Trinity is so stale and uninteresting.

Yes... well, God forbid an MMO is introduced after several years of the same thing that has mobs in it that have realistic aggro mechanics that don't center around one slow guy that does no damage yelling obscenities about its mother.  This radical change that no one is actually forced to play is surely a sign of the end-times.

You heard it here first.  Variety is the DEVIL, Bobby Bushea!!

Originally posted by mikuniman

I'm curious, knowing not having the combat model or the classes you enjoy why did you purchase? 

Well, speculation is just that, I didn't actually know for sure how it would turn out. They might have pulled it off and revolutionized the industry. It was also one of the biggest releases of 2012 and the PvP promises were too good to pass up.

I put a good 400 hours into it and enjoyed it up until about then, it took about that long before I started to dislike the combat and repetitiveness of PvP. So yeah, in my eyes, a good buy none the less; it just didn't have the staying power I expected beyond that because of above reasons.

Well I dont know about others, but I have to actually try things before I know for sure. Im very hands on, so even if something seems like I wont like it, I have to be sure, and give the benefit of the doubt. Played it for a month, didnt like it much, and didnt grow to love it either. But I did like the "concept" of dynamic events (FFXI's Campaign system was infinitely more fun). And I am a huge fan of exploration (I played the first 2 days of Tera like normal, after which I gave up on the "gameplay" and instead spent 2 weeks exploring all maps (including under and over it, and in areas that were still under development lol)

Originally posted by Eir_S

Originally posted by Dibdabs
Trinity is so stale and uninteresting.

Yes... well, God forbid an MMO is introduced after several years of the same thing that has mobs in it that have realistic aggro mechanics that don't center around one slow guy that does no damage yelling obscenities about its mother.  This radical change that no one is actually forced to play is surely a sign of the end-times.

You heard it here first.  Variety is the DEVIL, Bobby Bushea!!

Well if the alternative is the dance contest that is "action combat", please keep the holy trinity!!

However if we could move in a different direction that could be interesting, 

• Proper Collision detection to prevent "puppy piles"
• space players out based on the swing of the weapon they are using (a two hander takes more room than a short sword).
• Defense bonuses for having someone standing to your shield side.
• Ranged classes standing at range to inflict damage and behind the "shield wall" of the mellee classes.
• Removal of game mechanics that cause people to run around like headless chickens rather than standing and fighting like medievel men at arms.
• Encounters with larger numbers of MOBs rather than the stupidity of named "Boss" fights where the "Boss" dies over and over again every day like a theme park event.

Originally posted by craftseeker

• Defense bonuses for having someone standing to your shield side.

Ohh, I like that one.  Good idea.

I never knew I need a trinity game till I play GW2.

Originally posted by Eir_S

Yeah, Fivoroth's post confused me as well.  I mean sure, roles in GW2 are less obvious, but that's the point.  It is NOT all DPS.  There were times in the few dungeon runs I've done where I had to stop and place protection or healing on my party or we would have had more wipes.  The reason?  Well, I was actually thinking for once.  As a healer in WoW, or even a tank (though tanking was more fun to me.. aside from the yelling), I'd get bored.  In every trinity game since WoW, I'd get bored. 

Support roles are not just something ANet made up to sound trendy.  You just have to know what you're doing.  The great thing to me is, if you aren't needed for support at that precise moment, you can still do something else.  As a healer in WoW, if no one was losing health, you were just eye candy - and after Cata, you almost didn't need healers in dungeons til level 60.  I heard from a friend who quit WoW recently that things are so easy now it's not worth playing.  I blame that reason on a poorly implimented trinity system... and of course, nerfs.

Yes, but the same is true in games with a Trinity.

I play a bear tank in WOW.  My DPS is significant,  and on many fights surpasses everyone else because I am hitting more targetst than they should be.  I also have 3 or 4  different  CCs that I use, some are simple knockbacks, some are interrupts, some are roots.  I have buffs I cast before fights, and after fights I have a Rez.  When I am being hardcore, I even have an in-battle rez.

My second character is a Discipline Priest.  On almost all content, I spend about half my time DPSing which generates random heals to my party.  The other part of the time I directly shield or heal my party.  I also have a silence that I use regularly, a pet that I can pull out occassionally, I have a root CC against everyone and a specific long-term CC against undead.

The problem with these type of debates is people like ´a game´ more than another game, and then twist the argument to make their game sound better.   Yes, if you take the most absolute most boring gamestyle of a healer ( just casting one spell to heal one person) it is boring as heck, and then in favor of your game, you give this elaborate description of how a non-trinity character can do a million things to save the day... of course your game sounds better.   But trinity roles are not as boring as you make them out to be, and conversely, many players (as evidence in this thread) only play GW2 as basically a straight DPS without really doing much else.

My argument in favor of trinity games is just in the mechanisms of boss fights.  Devs can be a lot more creative with a trinity setup.   Players in WOW are getting to experience non-trinity type grouping with the new Scenerios... and while they are fun to zerg through, there can be no type of ´boss´encounter that requires very much coordination.

 

I there a 'system doesnt matter if its a good game' choice for this vote? I vote  that.

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..."

?

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..."

?

very much agreed nice post..  healer in PVP can be a mess at times as well.. in Rift they had such a hard time balancing heals in PVP it ends up being whoever had more healers won most every time. But again having classes with non set roles is another good way to go ala Rift then at least you open yourself up to a lot more options has multiple classes can tank or heal.. But others games that lock you into a single role for that character then it really becomes an issue with trying to find tanks and healers

The thing is, I kind of like the trinity but I think a "softer" trinity is needed.

 

I don't really believe in the whole "use a skill and you have threat all of a sudden, especially stacking every piece of threat gear imaginable. Threat should be real. 

What ends up happening is that any tank worth his salt will maximize this and the entire encounter just ends up being him absorbing/blocking damage and everyone else burning down the boss. That's pretty boring.

I like how tera does it in that the tank can stun and pull a boss and that you have to actively manage blocking and your resources. Still, there is a hate mechanic there but I can get between a boss and his target and stop him in his tracks with a large hit or a pull. but again, this is the direction I think it should go, Tera's system isn't perfect.

Perhaps allowing squishier opponents such as mages and clerics to activate shields when they have the enemy's attention but maybe then disallowing them to use their skills when they do this.

Allow warriors to position themselves between the enemy and the warrior's allies.

Making healing and buffiing active. Again, I kind of like the direction that tera goes with this.

And of course make it so that players who don't have a tank or healer or many damage dealers can still do things, but with greater difficulty or perhaps smarter playing.

 

The only real situations where the Holy Trinity is useful is in "End Game Content" for games. Before then, it's generally something you don't want to fit in. Tanks, Healers and DPS should be all playable from every class in the pre-"End Game Content" material. You can't heal those rats to death for quests nor can you heal enemies to death. You can't DPS yourself back to life nor can you DPS a mob into dealing less damage to you. You can't aggro yourself back to life nor can you taunt a mob to death. You have to have elements of every piece of the trinity in order to play successfully into the "End Game Content".

Holy trinity is a game developers' conveniance, developed when internet speeds were serious issues.   Collision detection was hard, so a simple workaround developed.  

 

You might like it, you might not.

Maybe something better than the trinity will come out in the future, but GW2 wasn't it.  The lack of class identity was a huge turn-off for me.  Also, I'm not a fan of the action-y direction new MMOs are heading in.  Strategic combat, please.

Originally posted by Arglebargle

Holy trinity is a game developers' conveniance, developed when internet speeds were serious issues.   Collision detection was hard, so a simple workaround developed.  

 

You might like it, you might not.

Well, the first MMO I played had collision detection and did not have the trinity (UO).  Not sure what the two have to do with one another...

I've never understood why trinity and classes are linked.  I think that's the major issue.  If all classes have the ability to perform all roles then you certainly would have more choice.  I know there are mage archtype players that wouldnt mind tanking, but they cant because the game is designed against it.  And yet, in high fantasy it is OBVIOUSLY possible for a mage to manifest layer upon layer of arcane protection becoming at times more untouchable than even a fighter (thinking back to ad&d here). 

 

Let all classes do all roles ( or at least expand a bunch) and i think alot of LFHealer/tank issues get resolved.   No reason a tank fighter cant exist in the same game as tank rogue/mage/cleric, etc.  Rift gets close for sure, though still applies unnecessary restrictions. 

 

I dont know if trinity is the best system, but it seems fairly simple to make it better. 

Get rid of classes all together.  Allow me to make a character and give me skill points that I can put wherever I want.  Allowing me to be a stealthy, fire-wielding, mage-type warrior.

GW2 went half way.  Someone else needs to bring it full circle.

Originally posted by Eir_S

Originally posted by Yamota

Originally posted by Aerowyn

Originally posted by fivoroth

 

What we have in GW2 is kinda meh PvE wise. In GW2 you have no roles. 

what are you talking about? and if you are just running around a dungeon doing dps and nothing else i bet you guys are wiping a lot or people are getting angry with you.. or you are just grouping with some people that really know how to play gw2 roles well.. also no healing at all in any form? have you really not played the game at all and are making blind assumptions based on a very limited amount of play?

And what exactly are the roles in GW 2? And dont say support because there is no class which can do full support, you still need to do a lot of DPS inbetween the cooldowns.

In GW 2 you have to take turns doing support and most of the time you just do DPS DPS DPS. Boring.

Well someone argued just above that DPS in most MMO's can CC... does that mean there are no classes that are full DPS in those games?  Your argument is based on your opinion which is great, but I don't think you're looking at the whole picture.  Even a priest in WoW can dps with offensive spells on the disc tree, does that mean they're not full healer classes?  Your logic is off.  I've played a support role in GW2.

Now what?

You are twisting my argument. I am saying that classes which cannot consistently do something, such as healing or CC, cannot claim to fill that role properly. Classes in GW 2 cannot consistently do anything but DPS so they are all, more or less, DPS with a bit of support/healing/CC thrown in.

Great if you like DPSing, not so much if you dont (and I dont).

The no trinity system sounded great before I tried it myself. But it turned out to be GW2's greatest flaw.