Yes D.. I took his reply as comparing GW2 zerg farms is not the same as EQN "instances".. Because in non restrictive open world fights, it will always end with ZERGFEST.. That is why in open worlds where it becomes 20 v 1 or whatever group size, the trinity is a waste of time.. There is limited strategy in open zone fighting like GW2 has.. I don't see EQN being any different..
I also am very skeptical of this superior AI and removal of the trinity. I was so ready to jump into GW2 and told all of my guild members in WoW how GW2 was the future. While GW2 does a lot of things right the removal of the trinity did not work out so well. I absolutely despise doing dungeons in GW2. After a few hours of play I feel as if I have "chicken-claw hand" from all the dodging and weapon switching that has to be done. I shouldn't have to feel like I've just played Beethoven's 5th on my keyboard to complete an event or dungeon.
One thing that really concerns me with the removal of the trinity is the lack of community. From EQ, DAOC, WoW, etc... you met people out in the world to fill a role in your dungeon party if you had open spots. If that healer or tank happened to be great at their job and a "good person" chances are they would be added to your friends list and possibly even a future guild member. I still have friends to this day that I met this way through the game. In GW2 you rarely even speak to anyone in your dynamic event or PUG dungeon run.
And in WoW you do?
Dynamic Events are GW2 open world activities. Quests are WoW open world activities. Are you saying you need to talk to do quests in WoW?
And dungeons in WoW? The tank leads, and if you aren't the tank you follow him around.
Currently playing: GW2 Going cardboard starter kit: Ticket to ride, Pandemic, Carcassonne, Dominion, 7 Wonders
MMORPG action combat without hitboxes is pretty primitive in my eyes ,its year 2013 allready ,hey
I know, right? In AC we had high, medium, and low attacks which opened the door to so many more possibilities but that, like so many other combat features, simply fell to the wayside.
Guild Wars hat locational hit and damage and was sort of an action-tab hybrid like its successor. You could put runes on each piece of armour just for that purpose.
I really like action-oriented combat. I'm sure it will keep evolving just like everything else.
I'm also not a huge fan of the trinity. Or I should really say not a huge fan of how tank, taunt, and aggro mechanics work in traditional trinity combat.
You couldn't aim though - was just random plus some skill auto default some area.
Full aim MMORPGs are a long way - most don't even allow hitbox aim - because they will murder your system.
Just came from anandtech forums where one guy with an i7 2600k@4.6GHz and a 7970@1200/1400 is complaining that GW2 is "slaying" his PC.
Not really ,World of Tanks is doing it just fine right now.
With 60 players per battle, if I'm not mistaken.
If you define a MMORPG by a game with a max of 60 players... and no mobs.
Well ,the tech is allready out.
Imagine football mmo,who wants 500vs500 football game anyways.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014. **On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
I also am very skeptical of this superior AI and removal of the trinity. I was so ready to jump into GW2 and told all of my guild members in WoW how GW2 was the future. While GW2 does a lot of things right the removal of the trinity did not work out so well. I absolutely despise doing dungeons in GW2. After a few hours of play I feel as if I have "chicken-claw hand" from all the dodging and weapon switching that has to be done. I shouldn't have to feel like I've just played Beethoven's 5th on my keyboard to complete an event or dungeon.
One thing that really concerns me with the removal of the trinity is the lack of community. From EQ, DAOC, WoW, etc... you met people out in the world to fill a role in your dungeon party if you had open spots. If that healer or tank happened to be great at their job and a "good person" chances are they would be added to your friends list and possibly even a future guild member. I still have friends to this day that I met this way through the game. In GW2 you rarely even speak to anyone in your dynamic event or PUG dungeon run.
And in WoW you do?
We used to.. before WoW nerfed the hell out of role playing and it became nothing more then a AOE mob hunt..
MMORPG action combat without hitboxes is pretty primitive in my eyes ,its year 2013 allready ,hey
I know, right? In AC we had high, medium, and low attacks which opened the door to so many more possibilities but that, like so many other combat features, simply fell to the wayside.
Guild Wars hat locational hit and damage and was sort of an action-tab hybrid like its successor. You could put runes on each piece of armour just for that purpose.
I really like action-oriented combat. I'm sure it will keep evolving just like everything else.
I'm also not a huge fan of the trinity. Or I should really say not a huge fan of how tank, taunt, and aggro mechanics work in traditional trinity combat.
You couldn't aim though - was just random plus some skill auto default some area.
Full aim MMORPGs are a long way - most don't even allow hitbox aim - because they will murder your system.
Just came from anandtech forums where one guy with an i7 2600k@4.6GHz and a 7970@1200/1400 is complaining that GW2 is "slaying" his PC.
Not really ,World of Tanks is doing it just fine right now.
With 60 players per battle, if I'm not mistaken.
If you define a MMORPG by a game with a max of 60 players... and no mobs.
Well ,the tech is allready out.
Imagine football mmo,who wants 500vs500 football game anyways.
First Person Shooters have been using aiming online for ages, way before WoT, and they are still going for 32vs32 tops. Maybe some 64vs64 here and there.
Then in a MMORPG you have mobs, you have quests and Dynamic Events scripts,etc.
The tech is here for small numbers but MMORPGs are about big numbers.
Currently playing: GW2 Going cardboard starter kit: Ticket to ride, Pandemic, Carcassonne, Dominion, 7 Wonders
I also am very skeptical of this superior AI and removal of the trinity. I was so ready to jump into GW2 and told all of my guild members in WoW how GW2 was the future. While GW2 does a lot of things right the removal of the trinity did not work out so well. I absolutely despise doing dungeons in GW2. After a few hours of play I feel as if I have "chicken-claw hand" from all the dodging and weapon switching that has to be done. I shouldn't have to feel like I've just played Beethoven's 5th on my keyboard to complete an event or dungeon.
One thing that really concerns me with the removal of the trinity is the lack of community. From EQ, DAOC, WoW, etc... you met people out in the world to fill a role in your dungeon party if you had open spots. If that healer or tank happened to be great at their job and a "good person" chances are they would be added to your friends list and possibly even a future guild member. I still have friends to this day that I met this way through the game. In GW2 you rarely even speak to anyone in your dynamic event or PUG dungeon run.
And in WoW you do?
We used to.. before WoW nerfed the hell out of role playing and it became nothing more then a AOE mob hunt..
Imagine if you had to manually party for quests in WoW.
Everyone would level (if they don't already) by doing dungeons.
Currently playing: GW2 Going cardboard starter kit: Ticket to ride, Pandemic, Carcassonne, Dominion, 7 Wonders
Could swear it stared in pen and paper games...could also swear it made for co-dependent SOCIAL gameplay...
Yeah, somewhere along the line that baby got thrown out with the bathwater. Not sure why or how, but it seems like every new MMORPG does as much to cater to the solo player as the grouplover, sometimes even more.
I understand wanting to get the largest slice of the demographic imaginable--the companies need to make money--I just wish that devs had said early on, we are making these games for groups of people to play together, codependently. If you don't like it, you need to find another genre. *That's* what I loved about EQ1 back in the day. I grouped with more people in a week then than I do in a year now in MMORPGs, unless you count the social network destroying WoW Dungeon Finder.
Oh well...
As to the lack of trinity? I loved the notion when GW2 announced it, but it was a terrible result in that game. I am willing to give EQN the benefit of the doubt, but I am not optimistic, "new, revolutionary AI" or not. I guess time will tell.
MMORPG action combat without hitboxes is pretty primitive in my eyes ,its year 2013 allready ,hey
I know, right? In AC we had high, medium, and low attacks which opened the door to so many more possibilities but that, like so many other combat features, simply fell to the wayside.
Guild Wars hat locational hit and damage and was sort of an action-tab hybrid like its successor. You could put runes on each piece of armour just for that purpose.
I really like action-oriented combat. I'm sure it will keep evolving just like everything else.
I'm also not a huge fan of the trinity. Or I should really say not a huge fan of how tank, taunt, and aggro mechanics work in traditional trinity combat.
You couldn't aim though - was just random plus some skill auto default some area.
Full aim MMORPGs are a long way - most don't even allow hitbox aim - because they will murder your system.
Just came from anandtech forums where one guy with an i7 2600k@4.6GHz and a 7970@1200/1400 is complaining that GW2 is "slaying" his PC.
Not really ,World of Tanks is doing it just fine right now.
With 60 players per battle, if I'm not mistaken.
If you define a MMORPG by a game with a max of 60 players... and no mobs.
Well ,the tech is allready out.
Imagine football mmo,who wants 500vs500 football game anyways.
First Person Shooters have been using aiming online for ages, way before WoT, and they are still going for 32vs32 tops. Maybe some 64vs64 here and there.
Then in a MMORPG you have mobs, you have quests and Dynamic Events scripts,etc.
The tech is here for small numbers but MMORPGs are about big numbers.
Sure.
<@Brannoc>; *Timothy* Will Fallen Earth use a hitbox to calculate damage or will it be rock, paper, scissors based like Planetside? <@FELee>; Fallen Earth uses hit boxes, skills, weapons, and armor to calculate damage. Base damage is determined by weapon and is modified by hit location and Rifle/Pistol/Melee vs. Dodge/Melee Defense and is then modified by armor. So it's toally FPS in hit determination and a mixture of FPS and RPG in damage determination.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014. **On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
Is a prime example of what people are afraid of. GW2 dev's call this organic grouping. IE your playing together without needing to form a group. What we players call this, is a mess. There's no group based tactics, no communication, everyone just running around doing their own thing.
Pretty much this. I don't see how that chaos is considered fun (or challenging).
Best Champion Farm Spot.
GW2 is filled with players that are all about farming shit from Champions as fast as possible and the best way to do this is join a zerg. They don't want something challenging, they want to make "money".
These people would find the fastest way to make money in any MMOs. It's all about the farming/effort ratio.
And I have a problem with if anything resembling this finds its way into EQ:N. In classic Everquest you would never find a place where you had a huge group of people mindlessly spamming attacks without any danger or coordination because the combat actually required thinking and teamwork.
MMORPG action combat without hitboxes is pretty primitive in my eyes ,its year 2013 allready ,hey
I know, right? In AC we had high, medium, and low attacks which opened the door to so many more possibilities but that, like so many other combat features, simply fell to the wayside.
Guild Wars hat locational hit and damage and was sort of an action-tab hybrid like its successor. You could put runes on each piece of armour just for that purpose.
I really like action-oriented combat. I'm sure it will keep evolving just like everything else.
I'm also not a huge fan of the trinity. Or I should really say not a huge fan of how tank, taunt, and aggro mechanics work in traditional trinity combat.
You couldn't aim though - was just random plus some skill auto default some area.
Full aim MMORPGs are a long way - most don't even allow hitbox aim - because they will murder your system.
Just came from anandtech forums where one guy with an i7 2600k@4.6GHz and a 7970@1200/1400 is complaining that GW2 is "slaying" his PC.
Not really ,World of Tanks is doing it just fine right now.
With 60 players per battle, if I'm not mistaken.
If you define a MMORPG by a game with a max of 60 players... and no mobs.
Well ,the tech is allready out.
Imagine football mmo,who wants 500vs500 football game anyways.
First Person Shooters have been using aiming online for ages, way before WoT, and they are still going for 32vs32 tops. Maybe some 64vs64 here and there.
Then in a MMORPG you have mobs, you have quests and Dynamic Events scripts,etc.
The tech is here for small numbers but MMORPGs are about big numbers.
Sure.
<@Brannoc>; *Timothy* Will Fallen Earth use a hitbox to calculate damage or will it be rock, paper, scissors based like Planetside? <@FELee>; Fallen Earth uses hit boxes, skills, weapons, and armor to calculate damage. Base damage is determined by weapon and is modified by hit location and Rifle/Pistol/Melee vs. Dodge/Melee Defense and is then modified by armor. So it's toally FPS in hit determination and a mixture of FPS and RPG in damage determination.
You aren't understanding what I said.
GW2 uses a hitbox, Tera uses a hitbox.
They don't play like FPSs though where you can precisely hit in the head or the leg.
Currently playing: GW2 Going cardboard starter kit: Ticket to ride, Pandemic, Carcassonne, Dominion, 7 Wonders
MMORPG action combat without hitboxes is pretty primitive in my eyes ,its year 2013 allready ,hey
I know, right? In AC we had high, medium, and low attacks which opened the door to so many more possibilities but that, like so many other combat features, simply fell to the wayside.
Guild Wars hat locational hit and damage and was sort of an action-tab hybrid like its successor. You could put runes on each piece of armour just for that purpose.
I really like action-oriented combat. I'm sure it will keep evolving just like everything else.
I'm also not a huge fan of the trinity. Or I should really say not a huge fan of how tank, taunt, and aggro mechanics work in traditional trinity combat.
You couldn't aim though - was just random plus some skill auto default some area.
Full aim MMORPGs are a long way - most don't even allow hitbox aim - because they will murder your system.
Just came from anandtech forums where one guy with an i7 2600k@4.6GHz and a 7970@1200/1400 is complaining that GW2 is "slaying" his PC.
Not really ,World of Tanks is doing it just fine right now.
With 60 players per battle, if I'm not mistaken.
If you define a MMORPG by a game with a max of 60 players... and no mobs.
Well ,the tech is allready out.
Imagine football mmo,who wants 500vs500 football game anyways.
First Person Shooters have been using aiming online for ages, way before WoT, and they are still going for 32vs32 tops. Maybe some 64vs64 here and there.
Then in a MMORPG you have mobs, you have quests and Dynamic Events scripts,etc.
The tech is here for small numbers but MMORPGs are about big numbers.
Sure.
<@Brannoc>; *Timothy* Will Fallen Earth use a hitbox to calculate damage or will it be rock, paper, scissors based like Planetside? <@FELee>; Fallen Earth uses hit boxes, skills, weapons, and armor to calculate damage. Base damage is determined by weapon and is modified by hit location and Rifle/Pistol/Melee vs. Dodge/Melee Defense and is then modified by armor. So it's toally FPS in hit determination and a mixture of FPS and RPG in damage determination.
You aren't understanding what I said.
GW2 uses a hitbox, Tera uses a hitbox.
They don't play like FPSs though where you can precisely hit in the head or the leg.
Sure they use something.
Point is still that the tech is already there,and now with voxel engine it could be even better.
Shoot someone in the leg,penetrate its armor or even destroy it and with voxels players can see in real time the what happened to the leg.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014. **On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
I also am very skeptical of this superior AI and removal of the trinity. I was so ready to jump into GW2 and told all of my guild members in WoW how GW2 was the future. While GW2 does a lot of things right the removal of the trinity did not work out so well. I absolutely despise doing dungeons in GW2. After a few hours of play I feel as if I have "chicken-claw hand" from all the dodging and weapon switching that has to be done. I shouldn't have to feel like I've just played Beethoven's 5th on my keyboard to complete an event or dungeon.
One thing that really concerns me with the removal of the trinity is the lack of community. From EQ, DAOC, WoW, etc... you met people out in the world to fill a role in your dungeon party if you had open spots. If that healer or tank happened to be great at their job and a "good person" chances are they would be added to your friends list and possibly even a future guild member. I still have friends to this day that I met this way through the game. In GW2 you rarely even speak to anyone in your dynamic event or PUG dungeon run.
And in WoW you do?
Dynamic Events are GW2 open world activities. Quests are WoW open world activities. Are you saying you need to talk to do quests in WoW?
And dungeons in WoW? The tank leads, and if you aren't the tank you follow him around.
Well, you are 100% correct. Since the addition of the dungeon finder you rarely speak to anyone else in your party. I honestly believe it has more to do with the cross-server issue more than just being a pug. If they were people from your server that you had seen out in the world that sense of "community" is a little stronger.
If theres no need for trinity then the AI is dumb. Sorry but in RL combat we use roles (didnt want to say trinity cause medics dont have magical healing powers).
When I was in the army they told us we dont fight unless its 3 to 1 odds. And certain wepons count as a number of people. For instance if you have 3 soldiers carrying a m16 or m4 and the opposition has a SAW or any other heavy automatic/stationary machine gun. You would retreat cause the odds are even. And when your against a SAW or a 50 CAL who do you think everyone is going to try to take out??? M203 has the role of flushing out combatants or killing a large clustered group (which if they had any training they would be spread out). Having defined roles or purpose in combat is the point of having a Team. To cover for the weakness of specializing in a role and also having that specialization when you need it oppose to everyone being decent at everything and one big zerg fest with large amounts of casualties.
If im some evil badass orc im not going to attack some random guy who hits me in a group. Im going after the guy throwing giant fireballs up my @55 or the guy whose stoping me from killing everyone by healing his teammates. Just like in pvp only a tard ignores the healer and goes for the guy with the sword and board.
This is where Agrro comes in to cover up the innate stupidity of AI. Now the problem with older systems is it uses a cheesy point system to control the AI, which made it realy easy.
If it was me I would just stick to the trinity and dont add in aggro management but give tanks the ability to lite CC to control the mobs movement and damage interupts (like jumping infront of the attack) to tank for the squishies. But also give Mobs tools to throw some chaos into the pull.
Best group encounters I had was usualy not haveing a tank but a off-tank class up front and just handling the madness that insues. Strong healing abilities; strong Mezz and forget CC; and easy, use this tank ability to have 100% agro is what makes trinity systems easy mode.
They don't play like FPSs though where you can precisely hit in the head or the leg.
Sure they use something.
Point is still that the tech is already there,and now with voxel engine it could be even better.
Shoot someone in the leg,penetrate its armor or even destroy it and with voxels players can see in real time the what happened to the leg.
Voxels aren't some magic bullet here, and they certainly aren't new.
What Gaia_Hunter is talking about doesn't need some contemporary or modern tech to pull off. Tech was never the problem, as we've seen it in MMOs as far back as 1999. It's part of the simplification of MMO combat, for better or for worse, that has been going on for years. It has returned in the action RPGs (ex: Vindictus) but I don't expect to see it in MMOs outside of very basic implementation (ex: Defiance - do extra damage by shooting the glowy part).
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
If theres no need for trinity then the AI is dumb. Sorry but in RL combat we use roles (didnt want to say trinity cause medics dont have magical healing powers).
Sure there are roles - you are a medic (but you still get a gun), you are a sapper (still get a gun), you are a marksman, you are light infantry, mechanized infantry, etc. That is your role.
But suddenly, in MMORPGs that isn't enough - on top of being a Mage you are a DPS, on top of being a Paladin you are a tank.
And apparently if your game doesn't have a tank/healer/dps holy trinity of roles, that means all the classes are the same as if in WoW, that has a holy trinity of roles a Mage and a Warlock or a Warrior and a Dead Knight are the same since they can play the same role.
So there is the trinity, which encompass healing, dealing damage, absorbing/avoiding damage, support, crowd control, and then there is the holy trinity which basically means each character can only do 1 single thing during a battle.
GW2 has trinity but it doesn't have the holy trinity since every character will at least do damage/healing/damage absorption during a single fight.
So lets not mix the two - one is what happens in battle, the other is the clear division of who does what and you can only do that.
Currently playing: GW2 Going cardboard starter kit: Ticket to ride, Pandemic, Carcassonne, Dominion, 7 Wonders
If theres no need for trinity then the AI is dumb. Sorry but in RL combat we use roles (didnt want to say trinity cause medics dont have magical healing powers).
When I was in the army they told us we dont fight unless its 3 to 1 odds. And certain wepons count as a number of people. For instance if you have 3 soldiers carrying a m16 or m4 and the opposition has a SAW or any other heavy automatic/stationary machine gun. You would retreat cause the odds are even. And when your against a SAW or a 50 CAL who do you think everyone is going to try to take out??? M203 has the role of flushing out combatants or killing a large clustered group (which if they had any training they would be spread out). Having defined roles or purpose in combat is the point of having a Team. To cover for the weakness of specializing in a role and also having that specialization when you need it oppose to everyone being decent at everything and one big zerg fest with large amounts of casualties.
If im some evil badass orc im not going to attack some random guy who hits me in a group. Im going after the guy throwing giant fireballs up my @55 or the guy whose stoping me from killing everyone by healing his teammates. Just like in pvp only a tard ignores the healer and goes for the guy with the sword and board.
This is where Agrro comes in to cover up the innate stupidity of AI. Now the problem with older systems is it uses a cheesy point system to control the AI, which made it realy easy.
If it was me I would just stick to the trinity and dont add in aggro management but give tanks the ability to lite CC to control the mobs movement and damage interupts (like jumping infront of the attack) to tank for the squishies. But also give Mobs tools to throw some chaos into the pull.
Best group encounters I had was usualy not haveing a tank but a off-tank class up front and just handling the madness that insues. Strong healing abilities; strong Mezz and forget CC; and easy, use this tank ability to have 100% agro is what makes trinity systems easy mode.
I agree with everything you say BUT the first sentence. It should read 'if there's A need for the trinity, then the AI is dumb', not 'if there's no need for the trinity...'.
Other than that I mostly agree. Real combat isn't that simple or structured. You assess targets based on how much danger they pose to your team, and you generally go for the highest priority targets first (unless there's a damn good reason you can't).
Problem w/ tanks & healers is the linear threat system. However, with games like GW2 you have more of what you're talking about, but people complain because its 'too chaotic'. Personally, I prefer more realistic combat mechanics, and I enjoy the challenge of actually having to control a fight with practical skills; instead of via some extremely arbitrary, linear threat meter. You also have to consider that in a more realistic combat system, healing has to be made more limited for balance reasons. The main reason healers had such potent heals in traditional trinity games was because the damage was mostly focused on 1 or 2 people.
Calling aggro/trinity primitive is the equivalent of calling your coding ability primitive. Aggro system AI is nothing more than a foundation upon which you build AI. Most games have infantile threat management systems like WoW, while other games like EQ1 have never been paralleled in mob aggro AI. The possibilities are really endless... that is unless you're trying to sell a bunch of ignorant gamers on a new system by insulting the old ones while you replace them.
They don't play like FPSs though where you can precisely hit in the head or the leg.
Sure they use something.
Point is still that the tech is already there,and now with voxel engine it could be even better.
Shoot someone in the leg,penetrate its armor or even destroy it and with voxels players can see in real time the what happened to the leg.
Voxels aren't some magic bullet here, and they certainly aren't new.
What Gaia_Hunter is talking about doesn't need some contemporary or modern tech to pull off. Tech was never the problem, as we've seen it in MMOs as far back as 1999. It's part of the simplification of MMO combat, for better or for worse, that has been going on for years. It has returned in the action RPGs (ex: Vindictus) but I don't expect to see it in MMOs outside of very basic implementation (ex: Defiance - do extra damage by shooting the glowy part).
Yes ,tech is allready there.
They can call realism primitive and simplified combat as new dynamic.
But noone knows yet for sure how the game is but i take realism over absurd any day.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014. **On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
It allows for no pulling, it has inferior CC, inferior tanking, inferior healing. The whole "action combat" is flawed from the get go. It also results in a lack of community and lack of interdependence.
And unless you have a brilliant solution that doesn't result in a zergfest, please for love of God stick to Holy Trinity which has stood the test of time.
So far, you've shown a combat video of a warrior zerging, more primitive gameplay and AI than I have ever seen in any MMO on the market.
On the one hand you claim you don't want to see guilds or groups fall apart because they lose an essential element in the trinity. That is the point....the interdepence is what makes trinity combat so strong. The depence on groups, on tanks, on healers, on CC, on pullers is the point of the trinity systems. They create the challenging content, they create the dependency, they create the community.
Action MMO have never managed to surpass Street Fighter on crack gameplay. So much for that "advanced AI"
The zerg conversation is amusing since I've zerged in every game, on occasion. Usually when very familiar with the content. Haven't many of us?
I admit though, that I wasn't a fan of the GW2 en masse zerg. I hope that en masse zerging might be less likely in EQNext because of the changing world and moving encounter locations. In GW2 players know where to zerg to, and in EQNext, they might not. Especially if finding encounters involves a lot of digging and tunneling first.
Colin Johanson said nearly the exact same thing before GW2. He specifically said someone could play a tank "role" or a support "role" if they wanted, but wouldn't be required. I don't trust dev TALK, I need to see this to believe anything they say at this point.
If in 1982 we played with the current mentality, we would have burned down all the pac man games since the red ghost was clearly OP. Instead we just got better at the game.
I find it hilarious how all the sheep got behind this statement. The instant this statement was heard, BAM, it became the new anti-trinity argument. "Well, the trinity only works because of poor AI." Ya, because you know, some developer said so. The game hasn't even been released yet, but apparently it's already proven to work. GW2 hype bandwagon, anyone?
If theres no need for trinity then the AI is dumb. Sorry but in RL combat we use roles (didnt want to say trinity cause medics dont have magical healing powers).
When I was in the army they told us we dont fight unless its 3 to 1 odds. And certain wepons count as a number of people. For instance if you have 3 soldiers carrying a m16 or m4 and the opposition has a SAW or any other heavy automatic/stationary machine gun. You would retreat cause the odds are even. And when your against a SAW or a 50 CAL who do you think everyone is going to try to take out??? M203 has the role of flushing out combatants or killing a large clustered group (which if they had any training they would be spread out). Having defined roles or purpose in combat is the point of having a Team. To cover for the weakness of specializing in a role and also having that specialization when you need it oppose to everyone being decent at everything and one big zerg fest with large amounts of casualties.
If im some evil badass orc im not going to attack some random guy who hits me in a group. Im going after the guy throwing giant fireballs up my @55 or the guy whose stoping me from killing everyone by healing his teammates. Just like in pvp only a tard ignores the healer and goes for the guy with the sword and board.
This is where Agrro comes in to cover up the innate stupidity of AI. Now the problem with older systems is it uses a cheesy point system to control the AI, which made it realy easy.
If it was me I would just stick to the trinity and dont add in aggro management but give tanks the ability to lite CC to control the mobs movement and damage interupts (like jumping infront of the attack) to tank for the squishies. But also give Mobs tools to throw some chaos into the pull.
Best group encounters I had was usualy not haveing a tank but a off-tank class up front and just handling the madness that insues. Strong healing abilities; strong Mezz and forget CC; and easy, use this tank ability to have 100% agro is what makes trinity systems easy mode.
I agree with everything you say BUT the first sentence. It should read 'if there's A need for the trinity, then the AI is dumb', not 'if there's no need for the trinity...'.
Other than that I mostly agree. Real combat isn't that simple or structured. You assess targets based on how much danger they pose to your team, and you generally go for the highest priority targets first (unless there's a damn good reason you can't).
Problem w/ tanks & healers is the linear threat system. However, with games like GW2 you have more of what you're talking about, but people complain because its 'too chaotic'. Personally, I prefer more realistic combat mechanics, and I enjoy the challenge of actually having to control a fight with practical skills; instead of via some extremely arbitrary, linear threat meter. You also have to consider that in a more realistic combat system, healing has to be made more limited for balance reasons. The main reason healers had such potent heals in traditional trinity games was because the damage was mostly focused on 1 or 2 people.
There is a lot of talk about REAL combat.
These are games with spells and monsters. There is no REAL about it. If you can have a spell that casts a fireball why can't I have one that makes the bad guy think I'm the biggest threat?
Comments
And in WoW you do?
Dynamic Events are GW2 open world activities. Quests are WoW open world activities. Are you saying you need to talk to do quests in WoW?
And dungeons in WoW? The tank leads, and if you aren't the tank you follow him around.
Currently playing: GW2
Going cardboard starter kit: Ticket to ride, Pandemic, Carcassonne, Dominion, 7 Wonders
Well ,the tech is allready out.
Imagine football mmo,who wants 500vs500 football game anyways.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
**On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
We used to.. before WoW nerfed the hell out of role playing and it became nothing more then a AOE mob hunt..
First Person Shooters have been using aiming online for ages, way before WoT, and they are still going for 32vs32 tops. Maybe some 64vs64 here and there.
Then in a MMORPG you have mobs, you have quests and Dynamic Events scripts,etc.
The tech is here for small numbers but MMORPGs are about big numbers.
Currently playing: GW2
Going cardboard starter kit: Ticket to ride, Pandemic, Carcassonne, Dominion, 7 Wonders
Imagine if you had to manually party for quests in WoW.
Everyone would level (if they don't already) by doing dungeons.
Currently playing: GW2
Going cardboard starter kit: Ticket to ride, Pandemic, Carcassonne, Dominion, 7 Wonders
Yeah, somewhere along the line that baby got thrown out with the bathwater. Not sure why or how, but it seems like every new MMORPG does as much to cater to the solo player as the grouplover, sometimes even more.
I understand wanting to get the largest slice of the demographic imaginable--the companies need to make money--I just wish that devs had said early on, we are making these games for groups of people to play together, codependently. If you don't like it, you need to find another genre. *That's* what I loved about EQ1 back in the day. I grouped with more people in a week then than I do in a year now in MMORPGs, unless you count the social network destroying WoW Dungeon Finder.
Oh well...
As to the lack of trinity? I loved the notion when GW2 announced it, but it was a terrible result in that game. I am willing to give EQN the benefit of the doubt, but I am not optimistic, "new, revolutionary AI" or not. I guess time will tell.
Sure.
<@Brannoc>; *Timothy* Will Fallen Earth use a hitbox to calculate damage or will it be rock, paper, scissors based like Planetside?
<@FELee>; Fallen Earth uses hit boxes, skills, weapons, and armor to calculate damage. Base damage is determined by weapon and is modified by hit location and Rifle/Pistol/Melee vs. Dodge/Melee Defense and is then modified by armor. So it's toally FPS in hit determination and a mixture of FPS and RPG in damage determination.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
**On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
And I have a problem with if anything resembling this finds its way into EQ:N. In classic Everquest you would never find a place where you had a huge group of people mindlessly spamming attacks without any danger or coordination because the combat actually required thinking and teamwork.
You aren't understanding what I said.
GW2 uses a hitbox, Tera uses a hitbox.
They don't play like FPSs though where you can precisely hit in the head or the leg.
Currently playing: GW2
Going cardboard starter kit: Ticket to ride, Pandemic, Carcassonne, Dominion, 7 Wonders
Sure they use something.
Point is still that the tech is already there,and now with voxel engine it could be even better.
Shoot someone in the leg,penetrate its armor or even destroy it and with voxels players can see in real time the what happened to the leg.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
**On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
Well, you are 100% correct. Since the addition of the dungeon finder you rarely speak to anyone else in your party. I honestly believe it has more to do with the cross-server issue more than just being a pug. If they were people from your server that you had seen out in the world that sense of "community" is a little stronger.
If theres no need for trinity then the AI is dumb. Sorry but in RL combat we use roles (didnt want to say trinity cause medics dont have magical healing powers).
When I was in the army they told us we dont fight unless its 3 to 1 odds. And certain wepons count as a number of people. For instance if you have 3 soldiers carrying a m16 or m4 and the opposition has a SAW or any other heavy automatic/stationary machine gun. You would retreat cause the odds are even. And when your against a SAW or a 50 CAL who do you think everyone is going to try to take out??? M203 has the role of flushing out combatants or killing a large clustered group (which if they had any training they would be spread out). Having defined roles or purpose in combat is the point of having a Team. To cover for the weakness of specializing in a role and also having that specialization when you need it oppose to everyone being decent at everything and one big zerg fest with large amounts of casualties.
If im some evil badass orc im not going to attack some random guy who hits me in a group. Im going after the guy throwing giant fireballs up my @55 or the guy whose stoping me from killing everyone by healing his teammates. Just like in pvp only a tard ignores the healer and goes for the guy with the sword and board.
This is where Agrro comes in to cover up the innate stupidity of AI. Now the problem with older systems is it uses a cheesy point system to control the AI, which made it realy easy.
If it was me I would just stick to the trinity and dont add in aggro management but give tanks the ability to lite CC to control the mobs movement and damage interupts (like jumping infront of the attack) to tank for the squishies. But also give Mobs tools to throw some chaos into the pull.
Best group encounters I had was usualy not haveing a tank but a off-tank class up front and just handling the madness that insues. Strong healing abilities; strong Mezz and forget CC; and easy, use this tank ability to have 100% agro is what makes trinity systems easy mode.
Voxels aren't some magic bullet here, and they certainly aren't new.
What Gaia_Hunter is talking about doesn't need some contemporary or modern tech to pull off. Tech was never the problem, as we've seen it in MMOs as far back as 1999. It's part of the simplification of MMO combat, for better or for worse, that has been going on for years. It has returned in the action RPGs (ex: Vindictus) but I don't expect to see it in MMOs outside of very basic implementation (ex: Defiance - do extra damage by shooting the glowy part).
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Sure there are roles - you are a medic (but you still get a gun), you are a sapper (still get a gun), you are a marksman, you are light infantry, mechanized infantry, etc. That is your role.
But suddenly, in MMORPGs that isn't enough - on top of being a Mage you are a DPS, on top of being a Paladin you are a tank.
And apparently if your game doesn't have a tank/healer/dps holy trinity of roles, that means all the classes are the same as if in WoW, that has a holy trinity of roles a Mage and a Warlock or a Warrior and a Dead Knight are the same since they can play the same role.
So there is the trinity, which encompass healing, dealing damage, absorbing/avoiding damage, support, crowd control, and then there is the holy trinity which basically means each character can only do 1 single thing during a battle.
GW2 has trinity but it doesn't have the holy trinity since every character will at least do damage/healing/damage absorption during a single fight.
So lets not mix the two - one is what happens in battle, the other is the clear division of who does what and you can only do that.
Currently playing: GW2
Going cardboard starter kit: Ticket to ride, Pandemic, Carcassonne, Dominion, 7 Wonders
I agree with everything you say BUT the first sentence. It should read 'if there's A need for the trinity, then the AI is dumb', not 'if there's no need for the trinity...'.
Other than that I mostly agree. Real combat isn't that simple or structured. You assess targets based on how much danger they pose to your team, and you generally go for the highest priority targets first (unless there's a damn good reason you can't).
Problem w/ tanks & healers is the linear threat system. However, with games like GW2 you have more of what you're talking about, but people complain because its 'too chaotic'. Personally, I prefer more realistic combat mechanics, and I enjoy the challenge of actually having to control a fight with practical skills; instead of via some extremely arbitrary, linear threat meter. You also have to consider that in a more realistic combat system, healing has to be made more limited for balance reasons. The main reason healers had such potent heals in traditional trinity games was because the damage was mostly focused on 1 or 2 people.
Calling aggro/trinity primitive is the equivalent of calling your coding ability primitive. Aggro system AI is nothing more than a foundation upon which you build AI. Most games have infantile threat management systems like WoW, while other games like EQ1 have never been paralleled in mob aggro AI. The possibilities are really endless... that is unless you're trying to sell a bunch of ignorant gamers on a new system by insulting the old ones while you replace them.
Yes ,tech is allready there.
They can call realism primitive and simplified combat as new dynamic.
But noone knows yet for sure how the game is but i take realism over absurd any day.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
**On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
Well said!!
Interesting dev comment.
To be fair, I'll judge the combat when I see it.
The zerg conversation is amusing since I've zerged in every game, on occasion. Usually when very familiar with the content. Haven't many of us?
I admit though, that I wasn't a fan of the GW2 en masse zerg. I hope that en masse zerging might be less likely in EQNext because of the changing world and moving encounter locations. In GW2 players know where to zerg to, and in EQNext, they might not. Especially if finding encounters involves a lot of digging and tunneling first.
If in 1982 we played with the current mentality, we would have burned down all the pac man games since the red ghost was clearly OP. Instead we just got better at the game.
I love everything about the new mmo game slyle of everquest next,
can not wait to get my grubby hands on it-thanks for changing the boring mmo game style of old.
any one that does not like the future of mmo gaming go and crowd fund the old style.
Just as I feared, GW2 style grouping.
Yawn.
There is a lot of talk about REAL combat.
These are games with spells and monsters. There is no REAL about it. If you can have a spell that casts a fireball why can't I have one that makes the bad guy think I'm the biggest threat?