Blood Red Arachnid.2493 Posted January 28, 2018 Share Posted January 28, 2018 > @"mauried.5608" said: > Maybe if people could define what they mean by a trinity system. > eg in such a system could only healers rez dead players? > And should healing classes not be able to do any damage? > Well, if you want to be particularly obtuse... The "holy trinity" is a reference to the World of Warcraft class scheme, in which the game is based around 3 different grand roles. Tanks, Healers, and DPS. This was done in WoW particularly because it was a simple way to design the game's aggro management system, giving players a degree of control while also allowing the developers to fine-tune content based on the total effective health per second of a group. This became known as the holy trinity, because for nearly a decade every single MMO released either directly copied or was inspired by WoW's model. The amount of WoW clones was so copious that the role system became the unspoken norm of MMOs. To that end, when we say "Holy Trinity", we are specifically referring to the class mechanics established by World of Warcraft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zaxares.5419 Posted January 28, 2018 Share Posted January 28, 2018 I think that it failed in the sense that DPS was (and still is) over-favoured in encounter design. High DPS groups are supposed to be a high-risk, high-reward strategy, but often you can mitigate a lot of the risk by simply pushing enemies from one phase to the next, or killing them before they have a chance to do anything. Enemies tend to deal out their damage via large singular attacks, rather than a "death by cuts" approach, or unstrippable Retaliation, which would overwhelm things like dodges and Aegis. All of this means that, while going all-in for damage is a viable (and even the safest) strategy, there isn't an alternative approach to beating many encounters. There is no way, for example, to make yourself or your group SO tanky/healy that enemies simply cannot hurt you at all, and you can just whittle down bosses at your leisure. (In raids, this is largely due to the Enraged mechanic. If Enraged wasn't there, I imagine you would see alternate group comps start popping up where the goal was to make yourself so resilient that there is simply no way the boss can kill you unless somebody screws up a mechanic.) Now, there ARE examples of where encounter design was done well in that there are multiple approaches to beating an enemy. A good example is Subject 6 from Thaumanova. The high DPS approach is to wait for him to finish his blocking move, then stun him and burst him down in a few seconds. BUT, if your group does not have the DPS, you can also beat the encounter by simply having one person attack the boss, and the other four just go around killing the small oozes and Vets as they spawn. The combined DPS of 4 players is more than enough to deal with the lesser mobs, and the slow pace of DPS on Subject 6 means they will spawn at a manageable rate. (He spawns small oozes with every 5% health he loses.) THIS is a good example of encounter design, where players are not simply pigeonholed into one way to beat the boss. I'm disappointed that more encounters aren't like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feanor.2358 Posted January 28, 2018 Share Posted January 28, 2018 > @"Atmaweapon.7345" said: > In vanilla GW2, it was Zerker or bust. Being able to choose 3 multiplicative damage stats that blew up enemies before they could kill you was the best route to take and any damage taken had to be mostly avoidable through dodges, blocks, and reflects. > > So what if we didn't have multiplicative damage stats? What if you had one main damage stat and the other stats you picked were utility or survival oriented in nature? Since both players and enemies wouldn't blow up as fast, would things have developed a different way? > > For example, eliminate Precision, Ferocity, and Expertise. Would everyone go Power/Cond/X stat? Or would increases from your off-stat be somewhat negligible, like Druids that can mix Harrier/Minstrel pieces without much fuss? Regardless of the system, PvE will always be about dealing maximum damage in minimum time. By the way, you can mix stats as a damage dealer. It's just that you don't gain any real benefit and end up wasting stats that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feanor.2358 Posted January 28, 2018 Share Posted January 28, 2018 > @"Rauderi.8706" said: > > @"Khisanth.2948" said: > > It failed because the devs couldn't figure out how to design fights for a non-trinity system. > > I seriously thought I was alone in thinking that. > > Non-trinity combat didn't fail, per se, but the combat designers were still designing fights for older paradigms. When everyone can heal and mitigate damage, it makes more sense to threaten lots of players at once, rather than hamfisting a KO onto one of them. But most of what we got were champs that chase one character around and bludgeon it to death and then move onto the next. > > We got monoliths, when we should have been contending with swarms or larger groups of exceptional enemies. We should have multiple objectives, which is something we started to see during LS1 and the Marionette fight. > > And honestly, forced Trinity makes for some boring fights. Or at least very rote. Tank, go blow your cooldowns and then wiggle around a bit. Healer, spam 1 until the tank needs more healing. DPS, don't stand in the red things that are the only thing threatening you. No seriously, stop. ...Healer, you can do your AoE now because the DPS are in the fire again. Blah. Commence rotation hypnosis. See, the trinity isn't forced. It was never an intent, but it is a natural result. Any combat system sophisticated enough to make fun combat ends up in a trinity meta. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MachineManXX.9746 Posted January 28, 2018 Share Posted January 28, 2018 > @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said: > > @"mauried.5608" said: > > Maybe if people could define what they mean by a trinity system. > > eg in such a system could only healers rez dead players? > > And should healing classes not be able to do any damage? > > > > Well, if you want to be particularly obtuse... > > The "holy trinity" is a reference to the World of Warcraft class scheme, in which the game is based around 3 different grand roles. Tanks, Healers, and DPS. This was done in WoW particularly because it was a simple way to design the game's aggro management system, giving players a degree of control while also allowing the developers to fine-tune content based on the total effective health per second of a group. > > This became known as the holy trinity, because for nearly a decade every single MMO released either directly copied or was inspired by WoW's model. The amount of WoW clones was so copious that the role system became the unspoken norm of MMOs. To that end, when we say "Holy Trinity", we are specifically referring to the class mechanics established by World of Warcraft. Except, WoW copied this from Everquest. EQ established the trinity years before WoW even existed. Other than that, I agree with your assessment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Kreegan.8123 Posted January 28, 2018 Share Posted January 28, 2018 Everyone to their own opinion... IMHO, the non-trinity design has numerous negative side effects. For instance, gear in GW2 exists only to provide stats... there are three different types of armor (light, medium, heavy), but characters are not noticeably more survivable in heavy armor than light armor. I have one character of each class; whatever armor class the character has, for tough opponents the character dies in seconds unless it is able to kill the opponent. So, high DPS classes like elementalists burn down their opponents more quickly by a fraction of a second or two than lower DPS classes like warriors, but neither is otherwise more survivable. This fallacy in design becomes very apparent in WvWvW. If you play WvWvW the first thing you notice is that it's nothing but zergs... and, in general, the zergs don't fight each other unless one zerg is significantly weaker than the other... BECAUSE THEN YOU MIGHT DIE. There aren't any tanks to take the brunt of the other zerg's attack and no healers to keep them alive, so zergs avoid each other and concentrate on going after unprotected forts, walls, gates... I've actually seen zergs run right by each other. Players don't attack other players unless they are stragglers, and then five or six players from a zerg will stun/root/knockdown that straggler and it is dead within seconds; targeted players can't dodge; can't heal; and can't run away. In other words, players avoid the risk of dying by not fighting each other. Worst world PvP I've ever experienced. So, that being the case in PvE and PvP, why don't we just have characters running around naked or in street clothes and assign them stats as "loot", or let them buy stats from vendors? Why bother with the artwork? While the concept of the "holy trinity" got overblown in most games, there were some advantages to characterizations of classes in that form (or even better, in the manner of EQ with many very distinct skill sets); the gameplay was -- to be blunt -- a hell of a lot more sophisticated than what exists in GW2. It was also possible to have hybrid classes; my favorite class of all time was the WoW druid (the original skill set) that could be configured as DPS, healer, or tank. Let the player decide how the character is going to play... on a PvP server, I remember one fight (both maxed out characters) where I battled an undead priest with my high elf druid; the fight lasted almost ten minutes. It was a classic... we had an audience of at least twenty other players watching the epic battle (instead of fighting each other). We both died within a microsecond of each other due to DoTs; I was exhausted; I'm sure the other player behind the undead priest was, too. I was glad it was over... but it's a PvP fight I'll always remember. And that was in 2005. Could that ever happen in GW2?? Not a chance. The only thing important in GW2 is map completion (inclusive of hero points and mastery points), and that isn't exactly memorable. So, IMHO, the non-trinity design was a massive mistake. If WoW hadn't changed so drastically over time, I'd still be playing it (EQ, too); unfortunately, as has also occurred in GW2, expansions don't make things better. Expansions always seem to make things worse by changing things that shouldn't change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astralporing.1957 Posted January 28, 2018 Share Posted January 28, 2018 > @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said: > > @"mauried.5608" said: > > Maybe if people could define what they mean by a trinity system. > > eg in such a system could only healers rez dead players? > > And should healing classes not be able to do any damage? > > > > Well, if you want to be particularly obtuse... > > The "holy trinity" is a reference to the World of Warcraft class scheme, in which the game is based around 3 different grand roles. Tanks, Healers, and DPS. This was done in WoW particularly because it was a simple way to design the game's aggro management system, giving players a degree of control while also allowing the developers to fine-tune content based on the total effective health per second of a group. > > This became known as the holy trinity, because for nearly a decade every single MMO released either directly copied or was inspired by WoW's model. The amount of WoW clones was so copious that the role system became the unspoken norm of MMOs. To that end, when we say "Holy Trinity", we are specifically referring to the class mechanics established by World of Warcraft. Actually, the model is much, much older than this, and goes back to the MUDs (the text-based online RPG games, that were popular in old days, before EQ). And is a consequence of old, dnd-based class archetypes (thief, mage, _warrior_, **cleric**) coupled with poor AI and positioning having no meaning. And it's a norm in most MMOs even today simply because, if it works (and it does, if the game does not go out of the way to prevent players from using this model) it tends to be extremely effective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STIHL.2489 Posted January 28, 2018 Share Posted January 28, 2018 > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said: > > > @"mauried.5608" said: > > > Maybe if people could define what they mean by a trinity system. > > > eg in such a system could only healers rez dead players? > > > And should healing classes not be able to do any damage? > > > > > > > Well, if you want to be particularly obtuse... > > > > The "holy trinity" is a reference to the World of Warcraft class scheme, in which the game is based around 3 different grand roles. Tanks, Healers, and DPS. This was done in WoW particularly because it was a simple way to design the game's aggro management system, giving players a degree of control while also allowing the developers to fine-tune content based on the total effective health per second of a group. > > > > This became known as the holy trinity, because for nearly a decade every single MMO released either directly copied or was inspired by WoW's model. The amount of WoW clones was so copious that the role system became the unspoken norm of MMOs. To that end, when we say "Holy Trinity", we are specifically referring to the class mechanics established by World of Warcraft. > Actually, the model is much, much older than this, and goes back to the MUDs (the text-based online RPG games, that were popular in old days, before EQ). And is a consequence of old, dnd-based class archetypes (thief, mage, _warrior_, **cleric**) coupled with poor AI and positioning having no meaning. And it's a norm in most MMOs even today simply because, if it works (and it does, if the game does not go out of the way to prevent players from using this model) it tends to be extremely effective. > You are right, Inter Dependency team based builds have been around for a long time, but the idea of a **Holy Trinity** actually started in _Ever Quest_, where the term was put into common use and maybe even coined. But the EQ Trinity was _Tank, CC, Healing_ . (Filled by Warrior (tank build), Enchanter, & Cleric) DPS was always looked upon as _filler role_ and never a part of the actual trinity, because any of the _other classes_ could do DPS, and often the sub optimal classes, like Paladins, Shadow Knights, Rangers, Monks, Wizards even off classes like Magicians, would be taken in to do the job, but overall. DPS as a role was a vastly expendable position and never really a part of the Trinity, as just the 3 core of Warrior, Cleric, Enchanter, if played well were sufficient for almost all non raid level content. In any case, yes the Trinity model far pre-dates WoW, by quite some time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linken.6345 Posted January 28, 2018 Share Posted January 28, 2018 > @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said: > > @"mauried.5608" said: > > Maybe if people could define what they mean by a trinity system. > > eg in such a system could only healers rez dead players? > > And should healing classes not be able to do any damage? > > > > Well, if you want to be particularly obtuse... > > The "holy trinity" is a reference to the World of Warcraft class scheme, in which the game is based around 3 different grand roles. Tanks, Healers, and DPS. This was done in WoW particularly because it was a simple way to design the game's aggro management system, giving players a degree of control while also allowing the developers to fine-tune content based on the total effective health per second of a group. > > This became known as the holy trinity, because for nearly a decade every single MMO released either directly copied or was inspired by WoW's model. The amount of WoW clones was so copious that the role system became the unspoken norm of MMOs. To that end, when we say "Holy Trinity", we are specifically referring to the class mechanics established by World of Warcraft. Wow wasent the first to have the trinity tho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blood Red Arachnid.2493 Posted January 28, 2018 Share Posted January 28, 2018 > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > > @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said: > > > > @"mauried.5608" said: > > > > Maybe if people could define what they mean by a trinity system. > > > > eg in such a system could only healers rez dead players? > > > > And should healing classes not be able to do any damage? > > > > > > > > > > Well, if you want to be particularly obtuse... > > > > > > The "holy trinity" is a reference to the World of Warcraft class scheme, in which the game is based around 3 different grand roles. Tanks, Healers, and DPS. This was done in WoW particularly because it was a simple way to design the game's aggro management system, giving players a degree of control while also allowing the developers to fine-tune content based on the total effective health per second of a group. > > > > > > This became known as the holy trinity, because for nearly a decade every single MMO released either directly copied or was inspired by WoW's model. The amount of WoW clones was so copious that the role system became the unspoken norm of MMOs. To that end, when we say "Holy Trinity", we are specifically referring to the class mechanics established by World of Warcraft. > > Actually, the model is much, much older than this, and goes back to the MUDs (the text-based online RPG games, that were popular in old days, before EQ). And is a consequence of old, dnd-based class archetypes (thief, mage, _warrior_, **cleric**) coupled with poor AI and positioning having no meaning. And it's a norm in most MMOs even today simply because, if it works (and it does, if the game does not go out of the way to prevent players from using this model) it tends to be extremely effective. > > > > You are right, Inter Dependency team based builds have been around for a long time, but the idea of a **Holy Trinity** actually started in _Ever Quest_, where the term was put into common use and maybe even coined. > > But the EQ Trinity was _Tank, CC, Healing_ . (Filled by Warrior (tank build), Enchanter, & Cleric) > > DPS was always looked upon as _filler role_ and never a part of the actual trinity, because any of the _other classes_ could do DPS, and often the sub optimal classes, like Paladins, Shadow Knights, Rangers, Monks, Wizards even off classes like Magicians, would be taken in to do the job, but overall. DPS as a role was a vastly expendable position and never really a part of the Trinity, as just the 3 core of Warrior, Cleric, Enchanter, if played well were sufficient for almost all non raid level content. > > In any case, yes the Trinity model far pre-dates WoW, by quite some time. The thing is, we aren't referring to Tank, CC, Healing, with DPS as a byproduct. We are specifically referring to WoW's model of Tank/Heal/DPS. That is the one that was so popular that it became a Jungian Archetype. The WoW system is technically misnamed, since it is really a dual system. The concept of aggro management has existed in games before WoW, and so as the idea of healers, but it wasn't until WoW that the system became so singular. I used to play City of Heroes, and that game had several different degrees of buffs, debuffs, and control elements tied in to its aggro management system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STIHL.2489 Posted January 28, 2018 Share Posted January 28, 2018 > @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said: > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > > > @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said: > > > > > @"mauried.5608" said: > > > > > Maybe if people could define what they mean by a trinity system. > > > > > eg in such a system could only healers rez dead players? > > > > > And should healing classes not be able to do any damage? > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well, if you want to be particularly obtuse... > > > > > > > > The "holy trinity" is a reference to the World of Warcraft class scheme, in which the game is based around 3 different grand roles. Tanks, Healers, and DPS. This was done in WoW particularly because it was a simple way to design the game's aggro management system, giving players a degree of control while also allowing the developers to fine-tune content based on the total effective health per second of a group. > > > > > > > > This became known as the holy trinity, because for nearly a decade every single MMO released either directly copied or was inspired by WoW's model. The amount of WoW clones was so copious that the role system became the unspoken norm of MMOs. To that end, when we say "Holy Trinity", we are specifically referring to the class mechanics established by World of Warcraft. > > > Actually, the model is much, much older than this, and goes back to the MUDs (the text-based online RPG games, that were popular in old days, before EQ). And is a consequence of old, dnd-based class archetypes (thief, mage, _warrior_, **cleric**) coupled with poor AI and positioning having no meaning. And it's a norm in most MMOs even today simply because, if it works (and it does, if the game does not go out of the way to prevent players from using this model) it tends to be extremely effective. > > > > > > > You are right, Inter Dependency team based builds have been around for a long time, but the idea of a **Holy Trinity** actually started in _Ever Quest_, where the term was put into common use and maybe even coined. > > > > But the EQ Trinity was _Tank, CC, Healing_ . (Filled by Warrior (tank build), Enchanter, & Cleric) > > > > DPS was always looked upon as _filler role_ and never a part of the actual trinity, because any of the _other classes_ could do DPS, and often the sub optimal classes, like Paladins, Shadow Knights, Rangers, Monks, Wizards even off classes like Magicians, would be taken in to do the job, but overall. DPS as a role was a vastly expendable position and never really a part of the Trinity, as just the 3 core of Warrior, Cleric, Enchanter, if played well were sufficient for almost all non raid level content. > > > > In any case, yes the Trinity model far pre-dates WoW, by quite some time. > > The thing is, we aren't referring to Tank, CC, Healing, with DPS as a byproduct. We are specifically referring to WoW's model of Tank/Heal/DPS. That is the one that was so popular that it became a Jungian Archetype. The WoW system is technically misnamed, since it is really a dual system. > > The concept of aggro management has existed in games before WoW, and so as the idea of healers, but it wasn't until WoW that the system became so singular. I used to play City of Heroes, and that game had several different degrees of buffs, debuffs, and control elements tied in to its aggro management system. Are we? I would say.. not. see, in GW2, we are more akin to EQ style trinity model, using "Support/Healer/Tank" as the required "Holy Trinity" , because, See, the "Holy Trinity" as it was called that originally due to the fact they were indispensable to the groups survival. In the case of GW2, we are running more with Druid/Chrono/PS as needed positions in place of what was once EQ's Cleric/Enchanter/Warrior, putting just blanket DPS as a side product, a vastly disposable/replaceable position that can be filled by a variety of classes, as such there is nothing "Holy" about the position of DPS in this game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linken.6345 Posted January 28, 2018 Share Posted January 28, 2018 > @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said: > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > > > @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said: > > > > > @"mauried.5608" said: > > > > > Maybe if people could define what they mean by a trinity system. > > > > > eg in such a system could only healers rez dead players? > > > > > And should healing classes not be able to do any damage? > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well, if you want to be particularly obtuse... > > > > > > > > The "holy trinity" is a reference to the World of Warcraft class scheme, in which the game is based around 3 different grand roles. Tanks, Healers, and DPS. This was done in WoW particularly because it was a simple way to design the game's aggro management system, giving players a degree of control while also allowing the developers to fine-tune content based on the total effective health per second of a group. > > > > > > > > This became known as the holy trinity, because for nearly a decade every single MMO released either directly copied or was inspired by WoW's model. The amount of WoW clones was so copious that the role system became the unspoken norm of MMOs. To that end, when we say "Holy Trinity", we are specifically referring to the class mechanics established by World of Warcraft. > > > Actually, the model is much, much older than this, and goes back to the MUDs (the text-based online RPG games, that were popular in old days, before EQ). And is a consequence of old, dnd-based class archetypes (thief, mage, _warrior_, **cleric**) coupled with poor AI and positioning having no meaning. And it's a norm in most MMOs even today simply because, if it works (and it does, if the game does not go out of the way to prevent players from using this model) it tends to be extremely effective. > > > > > > > You are right, Inter Dependency team based builds have been around for a long time, but the idea of a **Holy Trinity** actually started in _Ever Quest_, where the term was put into common use and maybe even coined. > > > > But the EQ Trinity was _Tank, CC, Healing_ . (Filled by Warrior (tank build), Enchanter, & Cleric) > > > > DPS was always looked upon as _filler role_ and never a part of the actual trinity, because any of the _other classes_ could do DPS, and often the sub optimal classes, like Paladins, Shadow Knights, Rangers, Monks, Wizards even off classes like Magicians, would be taken in to do the job, but overall. DPS as a role was a vastly expendable position and never really a part of the Trinity, as just the 3 core of Warrior, Cleric, Enchanter, if played well were sufficient for almost all non raid level content. > > > > In any case, yes the Trinity model far pre-dates WoW, by quite some time. > > The thing is, we aren't referring to Tank, CC, Healing, with DPS as a byproduct. We are specifically referring to WoW's model of Tank/Heal/DPS. That is the one that was so popular that it became a Jungian Archetype. The WoW system is technically misnamed, since it is really a dual system. > > The concept of aggro management has existed in games before WoW, and so as the idea of healers, but it wasn't until WoW that the system became so singular. I used to play City of Heroes, and that game had several different degrees of buffs, debuffs, and control elements tied in to its aggro management system. City of heroes and city of villains is a whole nother game entierly and we havent got anything close to them after sadly or before for that matter. Wow was a huge success but calling it the birth tub of the trinity is plain wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blood Red Arachnid.2493 Posted January 28, 2018 Share Posted January 28, 2018 > @"STIHL.2489" said: > Are we? I would say.. not. see, in GW2, we are more akin to EQ style trinity model, using "Support/Healer/Tank" as the required "Holy Trinity" , because, See, the "Holy Trinity" as it was called that originally due to the fact they were indispensable to the groups survival. In the case of GW2, we are running more with Druid/Chrono/PS as needed positions in place of what was once EQ's Cleric/Enchanter/Warrior, putting just blanket DPS as a side product, a vastly disposable/replaceable position that can be filled by a variety of classes, as such there is nothing "Holy" about the position of DPS in this game. Yes, we are. WoW is the titan of the industry, everyone copies its system, and it is disingenuous to pretend it doesn't exist. Likewise, GW2 does not have a "holy trinity". Even in the highest end content of the game, only a chronomancer can be argued as a necessity. Everything else isn't. You don't even need a healer, and there are several classes that can fulfill the role to varying degrees. The abilities of GW2 classes are more nuanced, and there are several utilities that can't be generalized into the trinity. Likewise, the DPS in GW2 isn't a blanket side product. There are different types of DPS, applied in different ways, and these two factors determine the appropriateness of each kind. > @"Linken.6345" said: > > City of heroes and city of villains is a whole nother game entierly and we havent got anything close to them after sadly or before for that matter. > > Wow was a huge success but calling it the birth tub of the trinity is plain wrong. I never said it was the birth place of the trinity. It is the codifier for the trinity. That is, where the trinity become so popular and also so famous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STIHL.2489 Posted January 28, 2018 Share Posted January 28, 2018 > @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said: > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > Are we? I would say.. not. see, in GW2, we are more akin to EQ style trinity model, using "Support/Healer/Tank" as the required "Holy Trinity" , because, See, the "Holy Trinity" as it was called that originally due to the fact they were indispensable to the groups survival. In the case of GW2, we are running more with Druid/Chrono/PS as needed positions in place of what was once EQ's Cleric/Enchanter/Warrior, putting just blanket DPS as a side product, a vastly disposable/replaceable position that can be filled by a variety of classes, as such there is nothing "Holy" about the position of DPS in this game. > > Yes, we are. WoW is the titan of the industry, everyone copies its system, and it is disingenuous to pretend it doesn't exist. > You understand that WoW came after EQ and even hired several of EQ's developers right? So pretty much anything and everything in WoW, owes homage to EQ. Ergo.. everything copies EQ, not WoW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blood Red Arachnid.2493 Posted January 28, 2018 Share Posted January 28, 2018 > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said: > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > Are we? I would say.. not. see, in GW2, we are more akin to EQ style trinity model, using "Support/Healer/Tank" as the required "Holy Trinity" , because, See, the "Holy Trinity" as it was called that originally due to the fact they were indispensable to the groups survival. In the case of GW2, we are running more with Druid/Chrono/PS as needed positions in place of what was once EQ's Cleric/Enchanter/Warrior, putting just blanket DPS as a side product, a vastly disposable/replaceable position that can be filled by a variety of classes, as such there is nothing "Holy" about the position of DPS in this game. > > > > Yes, we are. WoW is the titan of the industry, everyone copies its system, and it is disingenuous to pretend it doesn't exist. > > > > You understand that WoW came after EQ and even hired several of EQ's developers right? > > So pretty much anything and everything in WoW, owes homage to EQ. Ergo.. everything copies EQ, not WoW. Not really. WoW simplified the system for its own game design, and it is that simplified system that everyone copies. They're called WoW clones, not EQ clones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STIHL.2489 Posted January 28, 2018 Share Posted January 28, 2018 > @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said: > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said: > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > Are we? I would say.. not. see, in GW2, we are more akin to EQ style trinity model, using "Support/Healer/Tank" as the required "Holy Trinity" , because, See, the "Holy Trinity" as it was called that originally due to the fact they were indispensable to the groups survival. In the case of GW2, we are running more with Druid/Chrono/PS as needed positions in place of what was once EQ's Cleric/Enchanter/Warrior, putting just blanket DPS as a side product, a vastly disposable/replaceable position that can be filled by a variety of classes, as such there is nothing "Holy" about the position of DPS in this game. > > > > > > Yes, we are. WoW is the titan of the industry, everyone copies its system, and it is disingenuous to pretend it doesn't exist. > > > > > > > You understand that WoW came after EQ and even hired several of EQ's developers right? > > > > So pretty much anything and everything in WoW, owes homage to EQ. Ergo.. everything copies EQ, not WoW. > > Not really. WoW simplified the system for its own game design, and it is that simplified system that everyone copies. They're called WoW clones, not EQ clones. WoW, was built off what EQ established, the fact that more people played WoW, and are ignorant of MMO history is not Support for your stand, it just shows how little people know what is really going on. On op of that, GW2, does not use WoW's trinity system, it uses Support/Healing/Tank, with DPS being a filler role. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blood Red Arachnid.2493 Posted January 29, 2018 Share Posted January 29, 2018 > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said: > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said: > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > Are we? I would say.. not. see, in GW2, we are more akin to EQ style trinity model, using "Support/Healer/Tank" as the required "Holy Trinity" , because, See, the "Holy Trinity" as it was called that originally due to the fact they were indispensable to the groups survival. In the case of GW2, we are running more with Druid/Chrono/PS as needed positions in place of what was once EQ's Cleric/Enchanter/Warrior, putting just blanket DPS as a side product, a vastly disposable/replaceable position that can be filled by a variety of classes, as such there is nothing "Holy" about the position of DPS in this game. > > > > > > > > Yes, we are. WoW is the titan of the industry, everyone copies its system, and it is disingenuous to pretend it doesn't exist. > > > > > > > > > > You understand that WoW came after EQ and even hired several of EQ's developers right? > > > > > > So pretty much anything and everything in WoW, owes homage to EQ. Ergo.. everything copies EQ, not WoW. > > > > Not really. WoW simplified the system for its own game design, and it is that simplified system that everyone copies. They're called WoW clones, not EQ clones. > > WoW, was built off what EQ established, the fact that more people played WoW, and are ignorant of MMO history is not Support for your stand, it just shows how little people know what is really going on. > > On op of that, GW2, does not use WoW's trinity system, it uses Support/Healing/Tank, with DPS being a filler role. What stand? The idea that people refer to WoW when they think of the trinity? That WoW codified the mechanics? Everquest doing similar things first is in no way a disproof of this notion. People see WoW, they copy WoW. If WoW copies EQ, this does not mean people are copying EQ. They're copying WoW. Also, GW2 doesn't use the trinity system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STIHL.2489 Posted January 29, 2018 Share Posted January 29, 2018 > @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said: > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said: > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said: > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > Are we? I would say.. not. see, in GW2, we are more akin to EQ style trinity model, using "Support/Healer/Tank" as the required "Holy Trinity" , because, See, the "Holy Trinity" as it was called that originally due to the fact they were indispensable to the groups survival. In the case of GW2, we are running more with Druid/Chrono/PS as needed positions in place of what was once EQ's Cleric/Enchanter/Warrior, putting just blanket DPS as a side product, a vastly disposable/replaceable position that can be filled by a variety of classes, as such there is nothing "Holy" about the position of DPS in this game. > > > > > > > > > > Yes, we are. WoW is the titan of the industry, everyone copies its system, and it is disingenuous to pretend it doesn't exist. > > > > > > > > > > > > > You understand that WoW came after EQ and even hired several of EQ's developers right? > > > > > > > > So pretty much anything and everything in WoW, owes homage to EQ. Ergo.. everything copies EQ, not WoW. > > > > > > Not really. WoW simplified the system for its own game design, and it is that simplified system that everyone copies. They're called WoW clones, not EQ clones. > > > > WoW, was built off what EQ established, the fact that more people played WoW, and are ignorant of MMO history is not Support for your stand, it just shows how little people know what is really going on. > > > > On op of that, GW2, does not use WoW's trinity system, it uses Support/Healing/Tank, with DPS being a filler role. > > What stand? The idea that people refer to WoW when they think of the trinity? That WoW codified the mechanics? Everquest doing similar things first is in no way a disproof of this notion. People see WoW, they copy WoW. If WoW copies EQ, this does not mean people are copying EQ. They're copying WoW. > > Also, GW2 doesn't use the trinity system. also.. WoW is a ripoff of Warhamer, but anyway. Again. sure it does. Druid/Chrono/PS, was a standard raid Trinity.. which is nothing like healer/tank/DPS, it is built on the Support/Tank/Healer diagram. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swagger.1459 Posted January 29, 2018 Share Posted January 29, 2018 > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said: > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said: > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said: > > > > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > > > Are we? I would say.. not. see, in GW2, we are more akin to EQ style trinity model, using "Support/Healer/Tank" as the required "Holy Trinity" , because, See, the "Holy Trinity" as it was called that originally due to the fact they were indispensable to the groups survival. In the case of GW2, we are running more with Druid/Chrono/PS as needed positions in place of what was once EQ's Cleric/Enchanter/Warrior, putting just blanket DPS as a side product, a vastly disposable/replaceable position that can be filled by a variety of classes, as such there is nothing "Holy" about the position of DPS in this game. > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, we are. WoW is the titan of the industry, everyone copies its system, and it is disingenuous to pretend it doesn't exist. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You understand that WoW came after EQ and even hired several of EQ's developers right? > > > > > > > > > > So pretty much anything and everything in WoW, owes homage to EQ. Ergo.. everything copies EQ, not WoW. > > > > > > > > Not really. WoW simplified the system for its own game design, and it is that simplified system that everyone copies. They're called WoW clones, not EQ clones. > > > > > > WoW, was built off what EQ established, the fact that more people played WoW, and are ignorant of MMO history is not Support for your stand, it just shows how little people know what is really going on. > > > > > > On op of that, GW2, does not use WoW's trinity system, it uses Support/Healing/Tank, with DPS being a filler role. > > > > What stand? The idea that people refer to WoW when they think of the trinity? That WoW codified the mechanics? Everquest doing similar things first is in no way a disproof of this notion. People see WoW, they copy WoW. If WoW copies EQ, this does not mean people are copying EQ. They're copying WoW. > > > > Also, GW2 doesn't use the trinity system. > > also.. WoW is a ripoff of Warhamer, but anyway. > > Again. sure it does. Druid/Chrono/PS, was a standard raid Trinity.. which is nothing like healer/tank/DPS, it is built on the Support/Tank/Healer diagram. And the templates for most mmo classes are from a table top game released in 1974. “Dungeons & Dragons was the first game to introduce the usage of character classes to role-playing.[1] Many other traditional role-playing games and massively multiplayer online role-playing games have since adopted the concept as well.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blood Red Arachnid.2493 Posted January 29, 2018 Share Posted January 29, 2018 > @"STIHL.2489" said: > also.. WoW is a ripoff of Warhamer, but anyway. > > Again. sure it does. Druid/Chrono/PS, was a standard raid Trinity.. which is nothing like healer/tank/DPS, it is built on the Support/Tank/Healer diagram. You're using "support" to generalize way too many things. You can define "healer" as support if you wanted to, but you're not just so you can call the game a trinity. Fact is, the game is built around a whole lot of things: Physical Damage Condition Damage Crowd Control Environmental Effects (Reflects, movement skills, group stunbreak, etc) Buffs/Boons Debuffs/Non damaging conditions/Boon Removal Heals Barrier Damage Types (Melee, Cleave, Projectiles, Spells) Aggro management of varying types (toughness, fixation, distance, max damage) One of the key points being that you don't just do damage. There are a multitude of ways to do damage, and these different ways in different combinations have varying levels of appropriateness for different parts of the game. I.E. Mirage's single target condi damage is great for raids, but terrible in non-boss fractals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STIHL.2489 Posted January 29, 2018 Share Posted January 29, 2018 > @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said: > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > also.. WoW is a ripoff of Warhamer, but anyway. > > > > Again. sure it does. Druid/Chrono/PS, was a standard raid Trinity.. which is nothing like healer/tank/DPS, it is built on the Support/Tank/Healer diagram. > > You're using "support" to generalize way too many things. You can define "healer" as support if you wanted to, but you're not just so you can call the game a trinity. Fact is, the game is built around a whole lot of things: > > Physical Damage > Condition Damage > Crowd Control > Environmental Effects (Reflects, movement skills, group stunbreak, etc) > Buffs/Boons > Debuffs/Non damaging conditions/Boon Removal > Heals > Barrier > Damage Types (Melee, Cleave, Projectiles, Spells) > Aggro management of varying types (toughness, fixation, distance, max damage) > > One of the key points being that you don't just do damage. There are a multitude of ways to do damage, and these different ways in different combinations have varying levels of appropriateness for different parts of the game. I.E. Mirage's single target condi damage is great for raids, but terrible in non-boss fractals. If you want to get technical, in GW2, everyone fills the DPS role, so making that a _role_ in and of itself is moot. So what you really end up with is Non-Healing Support, Healing Support, Tactical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astralporing.1957 Posted January 29, 2018 Share Posted January 29, 2018 > @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said: > What stand? The idea that people refer to WoW when they think of the trinity? That WoW codified the mechanics? Everquest doing similar things first is in no way a disproof of this notion. People see WoW, they copy WoW. If WoW copies EQ, this does not mean people are copying EQ. They're copying WoW. And, in case of the Trinity, WoW copied ideas that already were there. Even before EQ (EQ got that from Sojourn/Toril - the MUD original EQ concept was based on. Which in turn was based on even older MUDs). As far as Holy Trinity goes, WoW added exactly _nothing_ original to that concept. It's merely a best-known showcase of it. (And that ends my history lesson, let's not go on tangets anymore) Back to the topic: Notice, how GW1, although far less mobile, and having healer classes/roles, was actually _closer_ than current GW2 to the non-trinity model, and did that far better? I wonder why that was. Was it because most encounters were not revolving around single, big bosses, but more around dealing with groups of enemies (that seemed far better at working as a group than mobs in gw2)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granrey.8920 Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 I a full supporter of the non-trinity system but after playing this game since day one. I realized it did not work as intended. For instance: 1) I have rarely being on squad. As its not needed. 2) I have rarely needed help or help someone else as even the case you need help. you can always skip that content. 3) I don't know group mechanics on this game. So, when I am. I still play the skills as when I'm solo. Due to this, this is the game in which I have made the least friends or being attached to a guild. I don't believe I'm the only one and probably many people have left due to lack of attachement to other people in game. I play this game like a solo game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now